Football can be played in any town

The Star Tribune's editorial board has reiterated its foolhardy support for everything Minnneapolis.

Here's the web link.
http://www.startribune.com/opinion/editorials/116505978.html

Their rationale is that Minneapolis is the best place because of restaurants and transit, and that the upfront costs will be lowest. They base on that on absolutely nothing. I think their position is based on the fear of losing the tax revenues that come from the Vikings.

First, the issue of transit is meaningless, the issue of whether the Metrodome is easily accessible should be the consideration. The light rail is useful for people in south Minneapolis and near the MoA. That's it. Washington Ave is a complete mess before and after any sporting event at the Dome and there's little flexibility to change that, along with any other exit nearby the Dome, and the north loop area for a different stadium.

Second, restaurants are great to have, I won't argue with that. But football fans do more than just go to restaurants.

Last, I don't think the upfront costs to build a new stadium are really shown to be less in downtown Minneapolis. Whether that's really the case is up to the Strib editorial board to show because they suggested that's the case.

A co-worker of mine recently said that Minneapolis was the only place it would "work". I think this boils down to the fact that people are either afraid of losing tax revenue generated by the Vikes, or people think the Vikings are really the "Minneapolis Vikings", and not the Minnesota Vikings.

What I do know is that the Army facility in Arden Hill is huge, up for sale, and it's polluted. The cost of buying the land versus demolishing the Dome or acquiring land in downtown Minneapolis is more or less than the munitions facility should be a factor. How much it would cost to clean the land should be a factor. Also, football fans come from all over the state, not just from south Minneapolis and the MoA, and they like to tailgate. If anyone's been to Miller Park, which isn't in downtown Milwaukee, they know that a non-downtown stadium can work.

The economic impact of a new stadium is relevant if you want a multi-purpose location. But Vikings fans want a Superbowl championship. Whether Minneapolis can bring a Superbowl championship to Minnesota should be the question. Otherwise, for the rest of us as fans and taxpayers, we should want the best deal. If that means traffic jams in Minneapolis will guarantee Vikings wins over traffic jams in Arden Hills, then Minneapolis is the place. Minneapolis is already a viable location for a strong economy for dozens of reasons besides the Vikes. Otherwise, let's look at the real costs and benefits in different locations around town, and insist that public funding for a stadium is accompanied by public funding for schools, roads, bridges and the stuff we use everyday.