Where is Roger? - Page 3

NoelSeven · ‎03-09-2010

On 9/18/2014 terrier3 said:
On 9/18/2014 kittymomNC said:
Apparently he's laying low - doesn't have the you-know-whats to come out and face the music on how he's "avoided" handling all these situations.

I actually think the Condoleeza would make a much better commissioner...and I wasn't crazy about her in her previous jobs.

She loves football, isn't afraid to be a leader and has wanted this job all her adult life.

She would be fantastic, IMO, and would NEVER go into virtual hiding at a critical time!

That's an idea worthy of consideration!

A Thrill Of Hope The Weary World Rejoices

NoelSeven · ‎03-09-2010

On 9/18/2014 SydneyH said:
On 9/18/2014 terrier3 said:
No world is perfect...but -

I think Roger should resign, Condoleeza should get the job and institute across the board rules & regulations for behaviors that the league won't tolerate - no exceptions for star players.

Ummm, maybe Goddell needs to step down, but Rice would be a disaster.

Sydney,

How would she be a disaster? I'm really interested in this. Is anyone suggesting it publicly?

A Thrill Of Hope The Weary World Rejoices

NoelSeven · ‎03-09-2010

On 9/18/2014 Cakers1 said:
On 9/18/2014 SydneyH said:
On 9/18/2014 terrier3 said:
No world is perfect...but -

I think Roger should resign, Condoleeza should get the job and institute across the board rules & regulations for behaviors that the league won't tolerate - no exceptions for star players.

Ummm, maybe Goddell needs to step down, but Rice would be a disaster.

She wears boots well, though. ${#emotions_dlg.biggrin}$

She does! ${#emotions_dlg.laugh}$

A Thrill Of Hope The Weary World Rejoices

Qwackertoo · ‎03-11-2010

On 9/18/2014 NoelSeven said:
On 9/18/2014 SydneyH said:
On 9/18/2014 terrier3 said:
No world is perfect...but -

I think Roger should resign, Condoleeza should get the job and institute across the board rules & regulations for behaviors that the league won't tolerate - no exceptions for star players.

Ummm, maybe Goddell needs to step down, but Rice would be a disaster.

Sydney,

How would she be a disaster? I'm really interested in this. Is anyone suggesting it publicly?

I've heard and read about it being suggested. She is on the committee for choosing the rankings and playoffs in college football, a new system this year, with playoffs, instead of the BCS structure in years past. So apparently she must have some qualifications and background . . . but I don't know any details of her background in this area.

NoelSeven · ‎03-09-2010

On 9/18/2014 Qwackertoo said:
On 9/18/2014 NoelSeven said:
On 9/18/2014 SydneyH said:
On 9/18/2014 terrier3 said:
No world is perfect...but -

I think Roger should resign, Condoleeza should get the job and institute across the board rules & regulations for behaviors that the league won't tolerate - no exceptions for star players.

Ummm, maybe Goddell needs to step down, but Rice would be a disaster.

Sydney,

How would she be a disaster? I'm really interested in this. Is anyone suggesting it publicly?

I've heard and read about it being suggested. She is on the committee for choosing the rankings and playoffs in college football, a new system this year, with playoffs, instead of the BCS structure in years past. So apparently she must have some qualifications and background . . . but I don't know any details of her background in this area.

I only know that she loves sports and knows what she's talking about. She'd sure be taking a risk as the first woman (at least that I know of) in the position. She's pretty no-nonsense, she could handle it.

A Thrill Of Hope The Weary World Rejoices

esmerelda · ‎03-10-2010

On 9/18/2014 terrier3 said:
On 9/18/2014 esmerelda said: If taxpayers pay for stadiums, why are they named after businesses and not taxpayers?

The team owners sell naming rights to businesses and rake in a lot more $$$ that way.

The businesses didn't pay to build the stadiums - they just gave owners money so they get their name on TV, radio and signage at the stadium.

I know about naming rights. Don't you think the stadium is an expense paid for by some of the money the owners "rake in"? And please connect the dots for me how taxes I pay build stadiums.

*********************
Keepin' it real.

terrier3 · ‎03-10-2010

On 9/18/2014 esmerelda said:
On 9/18/2014 terrier3 said:
On 9/18/2014 esmerelda said: If taxpayers pay for stadiums, why are they named after businesses and not taxpayers?

The team owners sell naming rights to businesses and rake in a lot more $$$ that way.

The businesses didn't pay to build the stadiums - they just gave owners money so they get their name on TV, radio and signage at the stadium.

I know about naming rights. Don't you think the stadium is an expense paid for by some of the money the owners "rake in"? And please connect the dots for me how taxes I pay build stadiums.

Cities and counties & states pay for & build the stadiums with taxpayer money. They upgrade them with taxpayer money too.

There are no dots to connect. That's just how it's done.

Some municipalities have built stadiums in an effort to attract a team!

In Buffalo the county built the stadium, updated the stadium this year (135 million dollars of upgrades) and now the new owners and the league want a NEW, billion dollar stadium. They pay for the maintenance and security too. The owner keeps all the revenue from not just the game, but from any concerts or other events and also from the naming rights. The late owner re-named the stadium in his honor (Ralph Wilson Stadium), but for years it was Rich Stadium & he kept all the money from the naming rights.

Our city isn't out of the ordinary - in most cities, the taxpayers pay for the stadiums and the owners keep the revenues. The ticket revenues are shared by the teams - no money goes towards "rent" or stadium payments.

Not ONE PENNY they "rake in" through ticket sales goes to stadium payments or upkeep. Same with the TV money and the sponsorships and the apparel sales. All that money is shared by the owners & the league.

Qwackertoo · ‎03-11-2010

I just looked up the funding for Jerry's World . . . aka Cowboy Stadium in my ole hometown of Arlington TX with family still living there and we still visit. I knew about the general sales tax increase but since I'm not living there and voting, I didn't know about the hotel & car rental tax increases.

1/2 percent sales tax increase. I believe it is now 9.5% . . . not exactly sure . . . didn't pay that close attention while there this past March

And the VOTERS of Arlington voted to add a 2% sales tax in addition to already established taxes on HOTELS.

And the VOTERS of Arlington voted to add a 5% sales tax in addition to already established taxes on CAR RENTALS.

Similar was done in the 1990's for Texas Rangers new stadium.

It passed but you still had many unhappy residents.

That said . . . Tarrant County, where Arlington is located, has on their books where a senior citizens property taxes are FROZEN, I believe at the age of 65, not exactly sure, as my Dad retired earlier than that . . . but it does benefit those on "fixed" incomes . .. while he isn't hurting . . . his income isn't what it was in his productive earning years either.

You'd think . . . IF any team could afford to build their OWN stadium, it would be aka "America's Team" as they earn mega bucks on merchandising and have for DECADES.

That said, I believe the article stated The City of Arlington, in regards to the debt for Ranger stadium was paid off about 10 years early, but then that was the mid-90's and early 2000's . . . and they say the City is on track to pay off Jerry's World early too!

I'm just very, very glad I don't live in North Arlington and am not affected by game day traffic . . . and there have been instances where both teams have a game on the SAME day, but thankfully for the residents not at the SAME time . . . but still . . . early arrivals with tail gating and late departures makes for a traffic tangle.

esmerelda · ‎03-10-2010

On 9/18/2014 terrier3 said:
On 9/18/2014 esmerelda said:
On 9/18/2014 terrier3 said:
On 9/18/2014 esmerelda said: If taxpayers pay for stadiums, why are they named after businesses and not taxpayers?

The team owners sell naming rights to businesses and rake in a lot more $$$ that way.

The businesses didn't pay to build the stadiums - they just gave owners money so they get their name on TV, radio and signage at the stadium.

I know about naming rights. Don't you think the stadium is an expense paid for by some of the money the owners "rake in"? And please connect the dots for me how taxes I pay build stadiums.

Cities and counties & states pay for & build the stadiums with taxpayer money. They upgrade them with taxpayer money too.

There are no dots to connect. That's just how it's done.

Some municipalities have built stadiums in an effort to attract a team!

In Buffalo the county built the stadium, updated the stadium this year (135 million dollars of upgrades) and now the new owners and the league want a NEW, billion dollar stadium. They pay for the maintenance and security too. The owner keeps all the revenue from not just the game, but from any concerts or other events and also from the naming rights. The late owner re-named the stadium in his honor (Ralph Wilson Stadium), but for years it was Rich Stadium & he kept all the money from the naming rights.

Our city isn't out of the ordinary - in most cities, the taxpayers pay for the stadiums and the owners keep the revenues. The ticket revenues are shared by the teams - no money goes towards "rent" or stadium payments.

Not ONE PENNY they "rake in" through ticket sales goes to stadium payments or upkeep. Same with the TV money and the sponsorships and the apparel sales. All that money is shared by the owners & the league.

As I thought...none of my taxes have built stadiums...or is that "stadia"?

*********************
Keepin' it real.

terrier3 · ‎03-10-2010

On 9/18/2014 esmerelda said:
On 9/18/2014 terrier3 said:
On 9/18/2014 esmerelda said:
On 9/18/2014 terrier3 said:
On 9/18/2014 esmerelda said: If taxpayers pay for stadiums, why are they named after businesses and not taxpayers?

The team owners sell naming rights to businesses and rake in a lot more $$$ that way.

The businesses didn't pay to build the stadiums - they just gave owners money so they get their name on TV, radio and signage at the stadium.

I know about naming rights. Don't you think the stadium is an expense paid for by some of the money the owners "rake in"? And please connect the dots for me how taxes I pay build stadiums.

Cities and counties & states pay for & build the stadiums with taxpayer money. They upgrade them with taxpayer money too.

There are no dots to connect. That's just how it's done.

Some municipalities have built stadiums in an effort to attract a team!

In Buffalo the county built the stadium, updated the stadium this year (135 million dollars of upgrades) and now the new owners and the league want a NEW, billion dollar stadium. They pay for the maintenance and security too. The owner keeps all the revenue from not just the game, but from any concerts or other events and also from the naming rights. The late owner re-named the stadium in his honor (Ralph Wilson Stadium), but for years it was Rich Stadium & he kept all the money from the naming rights.

Our city isn't out of the ordinary - in most cities, the taxpayers pay for the stadiums and the owners keep the revenues. The ticket revenues are shared by the teams - no money goes towards "rent" or stadium payments.

Not ONE PENNY they "rake in" through ticket sales goes to stadium payments or upkeep. Same with the TV money and the sponsorships and the apparel sales. All that money is shared by the owners & the league.

As I thought...none of my taxes have built stadiums...or is that "stadia"?