Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

Full Version: City Council Committee Approves Lot J Funding
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
(01-13-2021, 09:47 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-13-2021, 09:18 AM)Mikey Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think that's the end point. When the shield decided they wanted to make London a yearly thing, Khan jumped at the opportunity, not only because seats weren't selling here, but the prospect of developing a second fanbase would only increase the potential revenue streams. Even if we end up with a waitlist for tickets in Duval, I don't foresee Khan abandoning London; We may not play the bulk of our schedule there, but I absolutely believe the notion of a home and road game played back-to-back is the future if the team wants to keep playing there.

Double bonus, game in London and a different event at the stadium/complex to keep Lot J pumping revenue into the pockets. Why wouldn't he opt for that?

I think the only way we get out of London is a new stadium lease that requires a full 10-game schedule to be played in the stadium, and I doubt Khan would sign off on that deal.

EDit: having read the rest of the forum, it appears this discussion is moot anyhow, move along, nothing to see here.

Khan has the team play in London to earn the revenue to contribute to the league profit sharing plan. He does it out of necessity because he can't raise the money here. That's what happens when we have a crappy team playing in a crappy stadium. People show up in London because watching American football is a novelty. Were they subjected to the same losing team week after week, Wembley would be a ghost town.

I'm with you. Anywhere else the fans would rip the Jags Ownership a new one.

We're probably the most patient fan base in all of sports, if not in the Top 3
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if Lot J was approved, would it only impact the taxpayers of Duval County ?  If so, I can't understand why we can't expand the impact (team effort) to include the surrounding counties such as St John's, Clay, Nasssau, and Baker.  As a St John's County resident, I'd be happy to pay some type of an assessment to secure the future of the Jags here.
(01-13-2021, 12:24 PM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ]Correct me if I'm wrong, but if Lot J was approved, would it only impact the taxpayers of Duval County ?  If so, I can't understand why we can't expand the impact (team effort) to include the surrounding counties such as St John's, Clay, Nasssau, and Baker.  As a St John's County resident, I'd be happy to pay some type of an assessment to secure the future of the Jags here.

You can write a check... You don't have to rope everyone else in who may certainly have little to no interest in the Jags. How much are you willing to pay? I'm sure Shad or the city of Jacksonville will take your money.
(01-13-2021, 10:13 AM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ]I'm listening to the mayor now. He's saying many of the No votes were personal vebndettas manifesting itself.

For [BLEEP]'s sake.
I would not doubt that for a second.

If we lose this team we are done as a major sports city. Leagues aren't expanding or moving here.
(01-13-2021, 12:27 PM)JagsFanSince95 Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-13-2021, 12:24 PM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ]Correct me if I'm wrong, but if Lot J was approved, would it only impact the taxpayers of Duval County ?  If so, I can't understand why we can't expand the impact (team effort) to include the surrounding counties such as St John's, Clay, Nasssau, and Baker.  As a St John's County resident, I'd be happy to pay some type of an assessment to secure the future of the Jags here.

You can write a check... You don't have to rope everyone else in who may certainly have little to no interest in the Jags. How much are you willing to pay? I'm sure Shad or the city of Jacksonville will take your money.

Let's just hypothetically say that I'm willing to pay $5,000.  That alone is not enough to do anything (kind of like contributing $20,000 to the Libertarian Party during an election).  That's why I'm including all of the counties that have beneficially value from the Jags being in Jacksonville.  It helps property values, business expansion and other aspects of the City.   Just look at Charleston and Birmingham.  They are cute and everything but Jacksonville has so much more beneficial value then do the other 2 cities I noted.  To make an impact, you need the entire population to in "all in" with regard to financial contributions.  If they do it based on property tax, than the contribution could be assessed more aligned with one's net worth.
Rory Diamond on 1010 saying that some of the No votes were definitely personal against Curry.

This is so stupid and childish. They should name some names and then those council members asked outright what their reasons were.

Just mentioned on 1010 that St. Louis sports radio is beginning to rally Shad Khan to move the Jaguars there.

It's hard to think that if we lose the team it will be strictly due to someone's hurt feelings.
(01-13-2021, 01:42 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Rory Diamond on 1010 saying that some of the No votes were definitely personal against Curry.

This is so stupid and childish. They should name some names and then those council members asked outright what their reasons were.

Just mentioned on 1010 that St. Louis sports radio is beginning to rally Shad Khan to move the Jaguars there.

It's hard to think that if we lose the team it will be strictly due to someone's hurt feelings.

There was also talk that this endangers the Fla-Georgia game.

Idiots!
We're not losing the team over this tiny lot J deal. Shad/Lamping didn't really even care about it they were just willing to play out the string since Curry was trying to give them such a sweetheart deal to save his mayoral legacy. Their eyes are on much higher shipyards/stadium deals. If those don't get worked out in the next couple of years then we can start to worry about losing the team.
(01-13-2021, 02:07 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]We're not losing the team over this tiny lot J deal. Shad/Lamping didn't really even care about it they were just willing to play out the string since Curry was trying to give them such a sweetheart deal to save his mayoral legacy. Their eyes are on much higher shipyards/stadium deals. If those don't get worked out in the next couple of years then we can start to worry about losing the team.

Exactly.
The football team just needs a shade structure.

Let other parts of city government worry about the downtown redevelopment and nightlife
(01-13-2021, 02:07 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]We're not losing the team over this tiny lot J deal. Shad/Lamping didn't really even care about it they were just willing to play out the string since Curry was trying to give them such a sweetheart deal to save his mayoral legacy. Their eyes are on much higher shipyards/stadium deals. If those don't get worked out in the next couple of years then we can start to worry about losing the team.

I do agree it ultimately boils down to the stadium although I think Lot J may have gone a long way towards eliminating the yearly London game(s). In the future, we can expect to see two or more games regularly outsourced over there.
(01-13-2021, 02:26 PM)hb1148 Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-13-2021, 02:07 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]We're not losing the team over this tiny lot J deal. Shad/Lamping didn't really even care about it they were just willing to play out the string since Curry was trying to give them such a sweetheart deal to save his mayoral legacy. Their eyes are on much higher shipyards/stadium deals. If those don't get worked out in the next couple of years then we can start to worry about losing the team.

I do agree it ultimately boils down to the stadium although I think Lot J may have gone a long way towards eliminating the yearly London game(s). In the future, we can expect to see two or more games regularly outsourced over there.

If the incoming QB and the FO regime can start winning games, along with a stadium upgrade, Khan will be able to raise adequate revenue here. Crappy team + crappy stadium = low ticket sales.
rube
\ ˈrüb
Definition of rube

1 : an awkward unsophisticated person : rustic
2 : a naive or inexperienced person

https://www.google.com/search?client=fir...&q=cowford
(01-13-2021, 02:42 PM)Jagwired Wrote: [ -> ]rube  
\ ˈrüb
Definition of rube

1 : an awkward unsophisticated person : rustic
2 : a naive or inexperienced person

Rube/X³
(01-13-2021, 02:26 PM)hb1148 Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-13-2021, 02:07 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]We're not losing the team over this tiny lot J deal. Shad/Lamping didn't really even care about it they were just willing to play out the string since Curry was trying to give them such a sweetheart deal to save his mayoral legacy. Their eyes are on much higher shipyards/stadium deals. If those don't get worked out in the next couple of years then we can start to worry about losing the team.

I do agree it ultimately boils down to the stadium although I think Lot J may have gone a long way towards eliminating the yearly London game(s). In the future, we can expect to see two or more games regularly outsourced over there.

The city couldn't (or wouldn't) even give any projections that lot J was going to be profitable. Get to work on the shipyards and lot J memories will fade to dust quickly.
(01-13-2021, 02:48 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-13-2021, 02:26 PM)hb1148 Wrote: [ -> ]I do agree it ultimately boils down to the stadium although I think Lot J may have gone a long way towards eliminating the yearly London game(s). In the future, we can expect to see two or more games regularly outsourced over there.

The city couldn't (or wouldn't) even give any projections that lot J was going to be profitable. Get to work on the shipyards and lot J memories will fade to dust quickly.

Get to work on the Shipyards?  You know there's already a huge problem with that, right?  Nobody wants to pay for the years of toxic [BLEEP] that's been simmering there for years and years.  You can't just get to work on the Shipyards.
(01-13-2021, 03:08 PM)RicoTx Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-13-2021, 02:48 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]The city couldn't (or wouldn't) even give any projections that lot J was going to be profitable. Get to work on the shipyards and lot J memories will fade to dust quickly.

Get to work on the Shipyards?  You know there's already a huge problem with that, right?  Nobody wants to pay for the years of toxic [BLEEP] that's been simmering there for years and years.  You can't just get to work on the Shipyards.

I mean get to work on the strategizing for it, like Lamping said yesterday. Not get to work on the construction already lol.
(01-13-2021, 03:22 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-13-2021, 03:08 PM)RicoTx Wrote: [ -> ]Get to work on the Shipyards?  You know there's already a huge problem with that, right?  Nobody wants to pay for the years of toxic [BLEEP] that's been simmering there for years and years.  You can't just get to work on the Shipyards.

I mean get to work on the strategizing for it, like Lamping said yesterday. Not get to work on the construction already lol.

My point still stands.  That's one of the main reasons it's been sitting there undeveloped forever.
(01-13-2021, 03:08 PM)RicoTx Wrote: [ -> ]
(01-13-2021, 02:48 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]The city couldn't (or wouldn't) even give any projections that lot J was going to be profitable. Get to work on the shipyards and lot J memories will fade to dust quickly.

Get to work on the Shipyards?  You know there's already a huge problem with that, right?  Nobody wants to pay for the years of toxic [BLEEP] that's been simmering there for years and years.  You can't just get to work on the Shipyards.

In a vacuum, can we not all support cleaning toxic [BLEEP] out of our city and river? It seems like this should be an easy case outside of development.
Personally, I love tailgating in Lot J. That said, I understand the business perspective of the development.

Reggie Gaffney (city council) was on 1010xl and stated the vote is not dead as he is attempting to round up another Yes vote for a subsequent meeting, hopefully in a month or two. He stated a few of the No voters may be somewhat regretful.
(01-13-2021, 01:42 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Rory Diamond on 1010 saying that some of the No votes were definitely personal against Curry.

This is so stupid and childish. They should name some names and then those council members asked outright what their reasons were.

Just mentioned on 1010 that St. Louis sports radio is beginning to rally Shad Khan to move the Jaguars there.

It's hard to think that if we lose the team it will be strictly due to someone's hurt feelings.

Names don't need to be named.  Most know who the people are who did so because they can't stand the mayor.  Some of that is justified based on the way he mishandled the JEA thing.  

There are guys who are looking to advance their political careers on the council including Hazouri and Carlucci who both want to be mayor.  Hazouri has been creeping around as he has had his toupee updated to be more age appropriate in a variety of elected offices.  His no vote on the Lot J project was nothing more than his declaration that he's trying to get back into the mayor's office.  

And Carlucci?  He's run before, and no doubt, will do so again.  

Then you have mindless idiots like Joyce Morgan, who is nothing more than a photo-op council member who is about as inept as it gets.  Totally useless.  But, she was in the media, so she is recognizable.  I've been at events she had absolutely nothing to do with, but you would have thought she organized them and stroked a check to pay for the way she comes parading in.  Wave, smile, pose, take credit, and leave.  She's got it down to a science.  Question her about issues in her district, and she smiles and gives some ambiguous non-answer.  Her claim to fame?  A roundabout.  Meanwhile, the corridor between Regency Square and the Mathews Bridge is dying, but hey, they're putting in a roundabout at the Merrill Rd. entrance to JU.  No doubt, she'll be there for the ribbon cutting.  If there's a camera there, so is Joyce.  

STL radio can do all the dances they want.  For now, the focus in Jacksonville should be on figuring out how to keep the stadium up to date with the rest of the league, and then focus on developing the shipyard property.  They neeed to look at Miami and what renovations they did with the stadium there and use that as their blueprint.  I know they've provided renderings of a covered stadium in the past.  They may need to dig up the old plans and reintroduce those along with other renovations the stadium will need to remain viable.  The league won't let them extend the lease here unless the stadium is significantly upgraded or replaced all together.  A new stadium doesn't seem likely considering the investment already made in Daily's Place and the practice facilities, so figure out how to make what's there more revenue friendly and state of the art.

The fact is, Lot J was always going to be a tough sell for the team because those who actually support it don't bother expressing their opinion more vocally by going to council meetings or contacting their council representatives.  If you heard Salem talking about it, 90% or more of the contact he had with his constituents on the project was opposed.  That's lousy communication from the team and the mayor on the plan.  You have to have to change that dynamic in order to pull off a project of that scope.  The team didn't provide enough detail beyond a host of different renderings, and didn't provide the city with any construction costs.  The team was asking for quarter of a billion taxpayer dollars and not providing any details on what was going to be built, or how much it was going to cost.  They thought they would walk out of there with the funding in place, but they ran into a few political hacks who were determined to embarrass the mayor.  There were a couple of principled no votes, but those guys have been opposed to the project from the start.  

There's plenty of blame to go around for sure.  Unfortunately, the fans will be the one to suffer the consequences.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9