I don't agree with the first paragraph. Renovation isn't good enough. It seems pretty clear we aren't getting a Superbowl again til we get another stadium. Dallas, or Arlington, is already lined up for one and their stadium isn't even finished. I think we can use the revenue of Superbowls returning to the city.

Also, no one talks about Houston or Detroit's stadiums cause what's there left to say? They have new stadiums, with adequate suites. Reliant has 187. The dome has about 137. That's 50 suites. So let's say suites gor for $5,000 a piece on average per game. $5,000 times 50 is $250,000 per game. Times 8 games that's 2 millions dollars in revenue per year the Saints don't have. Not counting pre-season or any dollars people who can afford $5000 suites will spend in the dome. And that's a conservative estimate. A 12 person suite at Ford Field in Detroit is $5800, 20 person $7800. Ford Field only has 140 suites, but I am sure they can charge more due to their newness, and all the other amenities present at the stadium. New stadium in Dallas? 200 suites. You can do your own math on what Jerry Jones will charge to see his Cowboys in a suite, and the additional revenue he will be getting. Oh, Phoenix gets the Superbowl in 2008 and Detroit got it 4 years after opening their stadium. Reliant got one pretty quick as well.

There's plenty of economic reasons for the area to invest in a new stadium, paramount is retaining the Saints. Tom Benson has made it clear a renovation is not enough, so in 2010 we will learn how bad fans want to keep the team here for the long haul. Despite Benson's revenue in any year, I agree with the need for a new stadium. He's an owner, and a lot of other owners are getting are have gotten new stadiums, and Superbowls came with it. I'm on board.

Do you think it's possible to sell 50 more suites in this climate, as a Houston sized city can? 70 more,like Dallas? This was my main point. I'll agree that it seems the league is awarding SB to shiny new stadiums, but NO is already one of 4 favored sites, and I think renovations should be given a shot. I believe we would still bag SBs.

I think the New Orleans economy will be solid by the time a new stadium is built, and whatever the number of suites they have will sell like a bowl of gumbo at Jazz Fest.

I was fixated on our pre Katrina economy being nothing to crow about, and wish I could be as optimistic. However, NO has a few things in her favor.

The Saints have made marketing strides towards becoming a regional team, like the Pats. Our fans still spread out all over the country can hip others to the Saints.

Statewide voters may be more likely to ante up for a winning team. I'm reading that some far-flung citizens and Reps wonder what's in it for them. The stadium initiative may even be able to woe some Cowgirls fans from up north.

The league seriously frowns upon owners whining and seeking to move, while they have season ticket waiting lists. They have also stated their wish that NO remain a football town. Supporting the Saints is up to ya'll, and I think the league would bend an ear for the fans' plight over Benson's.


What happened to my edit button?

Yup. I don't think there will be an issue as long as we continue the committment to winning. The product we were putting on the field through the Ditka and Haz administrations was embarrassing. We also have something we have never had before, a NATIONALLY recognized superstar in Reggie Bush. I think we absolutely could sell out additional suites.

Well the city needs to get cleaned up and get its act together. The voters need to get rid of all the trash that has been office. The US goverment is trying to help with all the inditements (?) being handed down now. The next step is to get ride of all the rest. Buisness as usual in the City must change. You have to to focus on bringing company that are the wave of the future. The ranking of the lower 40's in education does not sell well to companies looking for skilled labor. High very high learning curve if on exsists at all. Then and only then can you have any hope of selling suites in the quantity you guys are talking.
Anarchy and open rebellion against the political structure is needed. Take no prisioners. Build a big new jail for all them and get them all to court on time under the stronge arm of a new prosecutor. Hang them high and burry them deep.

One of my many pet peeves is this whole infatuation with the Superdome. For one it wasn't built for football, and you can see that because the seating is terrible. It hasn't had much of a winning history so stop comparing it to Soldier and Lambeau field. Sure it’s not the worst stadium, but it’s one of them. The only thing great about it is its location, which is why the Iberville projects are the best location for a new stadium. Think about what Canal Street would look like with a new stadium.

I love the Dome, however there are times when a change is needed. Is there no big business out there that is willing to step in and help pick up part of the tab. I will agree that the Saints and the fans need a new stadium.

It is time for one.

No, we don't have any more big businesses to foot part of the tab. We don't have Nissan plants, Delta Airlines, Nabisco, Coke, 3M, TBS, and Big Oil HQs around. This is why the other cities can sell upwards of 200 suites. Those major corps create major jobs. Our suite market has been tapped out for the forseeable future. We can't even hawk our naming rights.

Anyone's beef wih the Dome can be cured at 1/3 the price of a new one. We don't need another dome. We just want one. What we need is wetland protection, and streets, sewers & water lines repaired. We need to fix our hopelessly inept school and criminal justice systems. Civil servants need higher pay, so they can spend more money to create more jobs. We need to invest in attracting those major corps that always seem to skip over us for our neighbors.

Eventually is pretty vague. I'm proposing that the Dome can be made up to par with most stadiums for under 250 mil. I've just read that our homes sales have plummeted to the lowest rates since '03. I don't know what to say about your asserting that the issues I've outlined aren't problems in need of addressing. You can bring in the ghosts of JFK and MLK to lead us, but they'll still need money to implement their plans.

I guess we could keep ignoring the fact Tom Benson has said he does not want a renovated Superdome. We could just ingore that and let the Saints leave. Blanco already tried the renovation route, and Benson slammed it back in her face. We have until 2010 to come up with a deal for a new stadium, that's it. It doesn't really matter what you want, or what you say is viable or anything else, cause the person's opinion who does matter, Tom Benson, has stated he wants a new stadium. Now, you can tell him to shove it and watch the Saints leave, or you can accept the fact it is gonna take a new stadium for him to stay.

I guess we can ignore the fact that the league is against the Saints leaving such a supportive market (as they were with the Vikes), and stymied Benson's bolting to SA. Benson can sell, or accept a renovated Dome.

We can also promise him we'll start getting financing together for a new dome, beginning 2010. That's fine. I'm not the type to run out and get things for the sake of it, and I've seen not one tangible reason for a new dome in this thread, other than Benson wants one.

You'll have to convince voters statewide that Benson is the only opinion that matters, not just myself. You'd best get crackin. I'll be in Foxboro.

That's easy, you ignored suite revenue, and you ignored the fact that teams with new stadiums are getting the Superbowls. I could find a lot of things that aren't evidence if I ignore them. That's not how it works though. Also, 2010 is different than 2005. The league, or Tagliabue, forced Benson back cause of the black eye they would have gotten if the Saints left right after Katrina. That won't be the case in 3 more years. The league can't force Tom Benson to sell, and they can't force him to accept a renovated Superdome. That is, again, ignoring the fact. The best the league can do is step in and offer some assistance toward building a new stadium, but they can't force Tom Benson to do anything, it's his team. As a matter of fact, the way he caved after Katrina in coming back, I would think they gave him a kinda "Tom, be quiet and go along with this now, and if you don't get a new stadium we won't oppose you moving." One minute he went from being afraid for his life in Baton Rouge and firing anyone that was pro coming back to New Orleans, then the next he never wanted to leave? Seriously? Sorry I don;t buy it.

But if all you have heard is Benson wants a new stadium, then good, cause that's all that needs to be heard. Either we keep the Saints here by providing a new stadium, or we watch them go to Louisiana cause we though " the league was gonna keep them from moving." I ain't buying that.

Since you edited, I will do the same. I don't think it wil be hard to convince voters to pony up for a winning team. It was that crap that was being put on the field previously that turned people off. I mean, that's why the discussion is here right, cause SOMEONE feels we need to get cracking on a new stadiuma nd take Tom's threat seriously. I could see how it would be easy to call his bluff from Foxboro though. It would be like telling poor Africans to stop the blood diamond trade themsevles from here in the United States. The farther away you are the bolder you can tell others to be.

First of all, I edited to make my thoughts appear more concise, and to correct typos. Not to hide anything.

2: I have clearly conceded that the proposal has a better chance of passing while the Saints field a winning team

3: I know what the Saints mean to this region, and so does the league. I've lived here 25 years, and have no interest in the Saints leaving. The Saints are as much a part of this city as the FQ, or potholes. Losing the Saints would be devastating to the psyche of our citizens, and only Benson's abject greed and ego could bring that about.

4.The league has to permit moves by I believe at least a 2/3 vote. Benson can't just sneak off like Irsay, unless he shows NO isn't a viable market. That can't happen, unless fans abandon the Saints. They can't force him to sell, but you'd best believe they can force him to stay. What you think Tag's agenda was by convincing Benson to stay, and what he publicly stated, are two separate issues.

5. We've been through the issue of building many more suites. Our business climate simply can't absorb much more, due to all the reasons I've previously outlined. This is the reality of our worsening economy. We aren't creating more businesses and rich folks out of thin air.
Actually, they're fleeing.

6. Again.. The league usually awards SB to new stadiums. Yet again, NO is one of the top 3 destinations, and this isn't just my opinion. This is the owners, press, players and fans speaking. NO was passed over due to our uncertain ammenities here, hotels rebuilding, crime, Dome renovations, the proliferation of new stadiums, and the league wanting to see if we could yet handle lesser events so soon. A nicely renovated Dome will keep up us in the loop.


7. This is a discussion forum. Adults should be able to question the rationales of others. I'm done with this issue.

We'll start at 4, since 1-3 were statements.

4) 2/3 of the owners will not vote against Benson if he can show he can increase revenue in a different market with a new stadium. Know why? Revenue sharing. As long as the rich have to share with the poor, anything that makes the poor rich is viable. As far as Tags agenda, well, let's see: He could go our being recognized for all he accomplished on the league, or retire as the guy who let the Saints leave New Orleans during the worst natural disaster in US history. Seems pretty clear what his agenda was, protecting his legacy.

5) Haven't we sold out the existing suites? So who's to say we couldn't sell out suites in a new stadium? You can't build a stadium overnight, so who knows what growth will have happened by that time. Plus, it's not up to the city to sell out the suites, it's up to Benson to sell out the suites. So he controls his own revenue on that, pretty much ending the "I am losing money cause of the lack of suites" argument, and preventing him from allowing an inferior product to be on the field again.

6) You know the last time New Orleans hosted a superbowl? 2002. 5 years ago. We weren't even in the running for another one any time soon, and the Superbowl is booked now through 2011. We won't be seeing one anytime soon without a new stadium.

7) You can question whatever you like, cause as you said, this is a forum. But just cause it's a forum, doesn't mean someone has to see it your way.

Everybody keeps focusing on the economy of today, it's going to take time to either renovate the Dome or build a new stadium, the economy can't get no worst, so by the time anything is done, the economy will be strong enough to support it. Trump is in the process of building a hugh Trump Towers type building on Poydras st. with condominiums, upscale restaurants, and corporate business offices. With the world looking in on the recovery of New Orleans it's going to be very hard to go about doing business like before, you think somebody like Trump is going to invest that type of money in a project in a dying city, I don't think so. New Orleans will recover and be much stronger than before I believe that with my heart, I have to because it's my home. And as far as a new stadium goes, I would rather see them renovate the Dome, but if a new stadium is going to keep the Saints in New Orleans, than so be it because I can't imagine a New Orleans without the Saints. I wish there was somewhere else the Saints could temporarily play and build a new stadium on the present Dome site, but that's just wishful thinking. The river is the only viable site I can see making any sense, the Iberville Project site would cause to many logistical problems even though it's the perfect location for a downtown stadium, besides I hear that New Orleans Housing Authority is sending memos out to families that lived in housing projects before the hurricane that they have a certain amount of time to move back to the housing developments that are livable before they stop the current housing voucher program that they are living on, and the Iberville is the first site on the list because it was the lest damaged. So before they can even think about building a stadium on the Iberville site, there's a lot of political red tape they'll have to cut through and I don't think that's an avenue they want to travel.

No one said the city will die. No one wishes it, either. I questioned where the new businesses will come from to fill 50- 70 more suites, and outlined why business shuns NO. I didn't base my view merely on the current (and worsening) economy, but this city's track record of attracting investment throughout her entire history. NO's economy is basically agriculture, oil, chemical, tourism, and the port. All volatile markets.

Luring residents from other parts of the city to Trump Tower is much easier than getting business and upscale residents to settle here from other states. My view may have seemed pessimistic on the surface, but shouldn't be discarded any more than those proclaiming NO will make some stunning metamorphosis into a grand utopia.

NO will have a much work to do on many core issues. The negative climate here is crushing. Progress will take a hell of a lot longer than the time it takes to build a new Dome, in order to convince others that we deserve to be mentioned along with Houston, Dallas or Atl as a hospitable place for business. It's a shame that one of the oldest cities in the nation has accomplished the least.

I responded in the hopes that you understand why I said what I did, not to convince others to agree.

Plus you have to convince the voters in the northern part of the state to agree. That in itself will be a trick! Lest we forget they're mostly Cowboy fans. it sucks but thats the reality of it.

Hmmm I am shocked…
and a bit confused last I checked that the city is still rebuilding from the storm. So my question is where the hell are they getting the money to do this?

Don't say taxes because half of the people in the city working right now don't have green cards let alone play taxes!

and need I remind every one how few wining seasons this ball club has had over the years...
just cause they had a good season last year doesn’t make up for 25 years of losing

I say, give the city 5 wining season in succession or relatively close together and then we talk shop about a new home for the saints

5 seasons. Great plan. The current agreement runs out in 2010 and the Saints, per this agreement, can leave. So let them play well until 2012, 2 years of which will be in Los Angeles, then we build a new stadium. Solid.

ok good point but I ask again...
Where are they getting the money to do this when the city is still in shambles both socially and economically?

When it's all said and done the Saints aren't going anywhere, the new Governor whoever that may be will do everything in their power to keep the Saints in New Orleans. Plus, Tom Benson didn't make his money being stupid, he knows L.A. is not a viable place for an NFL franchise, the Rams left L.A. for St. Louis for Christ sake, St. Louis. The Raiders jump ship back to Oakland and apologised for moving to L.A., which doesn't say much for LaLa Land, what makes you think they would support the Saints. Then there's San Antonio, home of the Spurs, winners of four(4) NBA Championships in nine years, and they don't even sell home playoff games, they had the worst playoff home attendance numbers in the league, and the Spurs were on they're way to winning a Championship, now that's support. The Saints could never survive in those cities, once the honeymoon is over, so is the attendance, Benson and the rest of the Saints brass know that no one will ever support the Saints like the city of New Orleans and the entire Gulf Region. So I think everybody involved is going to do whatever it takes to keep the Saints home where they belong, because without each other they both will suffer.

I don't know. Why does that matter? Apparently if they propose something like this, they aren't talking about taking away from urban development to do it. Maybe if they cut back on all the slush funds and "secret projects" the money is there to get it done. Maybe the NFL helps. Maybe Benson helps. Maybe it's financed. Who knows? But I doubt they are taking away from projects that help the city grow to do it.

Where did you get information the Spurs were the worst in playoff home attendance, when they were 9th in the league in regular season home attendance?

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/attendance?year=2007

If you inferred cause the finals weren't sold out, that would be because NO ONE believed the Cavs would beat the Spurs, and why shell out a few hundred bucks to watch a known outcome? The first game not to sell out was the Jazz game:

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/b...k.3529103.html

Once Phoenix and Dallas were done, that pretty much guaranteed the Spurs the title. Anyone who lives in this city can attest to how much they love the Spurs, but even San Antonions don't have hundreds to throw away on expensive playoff games against inferior opponents.

You would also be dismissing the fact that San Antonio/Austin is one of the largest TV markets remaining without a pro football franchise. The support would be there, so this area is always a threat. Even with that, i'd prefer Benson just get his new stadium and stay put. I like the dome, but it's time has come and gone. Going back there for the Atlanta game will always be one of my best memories as a Saints fan, but it's time for some new memories in a new venue. Just not in the East.

Well Whodi, I got it from watching the finals. I watch how they said the Spurs were one of the lest popular teams in the playoffs, I got it from the commentators who said on national television it was a shame that the Spurs were going for their fourth Championship in 9 years and couldn't generate that much excitement amongst their own fans. I got it from a reporter(I think it was Kenny Smith or Steven A., I not sure), walking along the Riverwalk interviewing people on why the Spurs were not as popular as they should be. Most of the people he interviewed in San Antonio said their favorite team was Dallas and Houston, and Yao Ming, Tracy McGrady, and Dirk Nowitzky was mentioned as their favorite players, not Tony Parker or Tim Duncan, and that's a shame. Now I'm not dissing San Antonio, I happen to like the Spurs, but do you think if the Saints were playing in the NFC Championship game at home against a team everybody knows their going to beat, the fans in New Orleans would not sell out the game, even if they won four Superbowls in 9 years, you wouldn't be able to fine a ticket nowhere in the entire Gulf Region. Benson just uses San Antonio and L.A. as bargaining chips nothing more, he knows nobody would ever support the Saints like New Orleans and the Gulf Region, NOBODY! Like I said before, once the honeymoon is over the attendance would plummeted, Benson would have to pull an Al Davis, apologize for the move, ask for forgiveness and move back to New Orleans.

I disagree with you fully due to what I said previously, and due to the fact that I of course watched the finals being a spurs fan and you are greatly overexaggerating everything the commentators said, and interviews with "fans" on the riverwalk. I had a feeling though what you were saying was not based in hard numbers but based in "impressions." I live here, trust me you are wrong about how the fans feel about the Spurs.

I also disagree cause the NFL is the best, most loved, and most watched sports programming on the planet. There is almost no comparison at this point between NFL and NBA attendance and fan loyalty. You put a football team anywhere with people and it will ALWAYS outdraw the NBA. Football has done a beautiful job of creating one huge impression with fans that will keep people law til the end of time, parity. The fact we could go from 3-13 to the NFC championship game is a testament to the statement "An Given Sunday." You don't have that in basketball. You have the have, and have nots, and poor marketing. It's a league not on par with the NFL. So trying to compare what fans would be like between the two is almost irrelevant anywhere outside of Los Angeles, where the indifference is palpable. You'd also have to consider all the people who may be Cowboys fans in the area, but can't drive all the way to Dallas for a game, but love football. You'd also have to consider people coming from Mexico for games, where they sold over 100,000 tickets to see the Cards and the 49ers. So don't let that "impression" you got fool you. The NBA is not on the same level is the NFL, and would get more than enough support from this area. I just don't want it to be the Saints. I love going back home for games. But if more people think like you and so boo on a new stadium cause you think another area couldn't support the team as the Gulf South does, you'd be mistaken IMO. Difference of opinion I guess.

Forgive me if my thoughts are incorrect. Wasn't is said that New Orleans wouldn't be eligible for a Superbowl until a new long-term was in place, not a new stadium. It was only Benson's wish to have a new stadium. After Katrina the state and NFL together spent over 100 million to renovate the dome. If they plan to demo it and build a new stadium then that money used (which was substantial) was spent for nothing. Correct?? That only allowed the Saints to remain and play here for just 3 more years. I am all for a new stadium if it allow the team to stay. The N.O. Skyline would not be the same w/o the dome but then again I don't understand why they would demo it. It could be used for concerts, trade shows and competitions which could bring more $ cause its larger than the Arena. Then the new stadium could be for the Saints exclusively for games and training camp. I think by the time the new stadium is built the economy will be on its way up again. We all know that the team can be financial supported right now. SO, in a few years it will even be more profitable and better. If we can get a deal together for a new stadium in a year or so we would then be eligible for a 2012 or 13 Superbowl.
Just my opinion!
TGIF!

my point exactly

The league and Feds just spending all that money on the Dome was always on my mind while responding. I haven't found any evidence of the league being leery of the condtion of the Dome for SBs. Ol girl is in fine shape, but I'd still like those FQ balconies. Many other modifications are still on the drawing board.

To be fair, I'd like to submit that the Dome seating isn't optimal for basketball. The Final Four had beefs with the seating, and seems to be seeking other venues. I've heard Indy's new Dome was guaranteed the Final Four every 4 Years. I know the league awards SBs to new domes, but I'm confident that even if the SB went to a similar rotation, NO would still be in that number with our current Dome. At least until I hear otherwise...

I agree with most all of this, except, who said anything about demolishing the dome? And the Superdome HAD to be upgraded after Katrina. There was no other choice if the Saints were gonna play there. IF they didn't, the Saints would not be here now. The state and the Superdome made the league a promise they would be ready to open for the Saints to come back, and they did it. It wasn't just a normal time and they committed money to renovation. That money was a necessity to get the Saints back in the dome. IT has no bearing on any future money that would be spent on a new stadium. Other than that, I agree with you.

Most people want another Dome or retractable roof, if we build anew. I don't see any reason to build a football only stadium. That would be an even worse waste than imploding the Dome. The question now turns to having enough events to justify keeping the old Dome around. Seems we're just creating more problems.

Well, if the "new stadium" is in the East, convincing conventions and other events that are usually downtown to go out there will be pretty hard. If anything, I would think having the dome free on weekends during the fall would allow for more events to take place there. I don't see how it would be a problem at all. I am also pretty sure before a new stadium is actually broken ground on, a plan will be in place for the dome. They're not gonna build a new stadium without one.

There are many things the dome could be used for: a few examples are concerts, trade shows, conventions and sports competitions. (jewelry, craft, gun and boat shows, dance and cheerleading competitions, pageants)
The gun show was last weekend at the ponch. center in Kenner. It could be held at the dome and which may attract more vendors. Closer to hotels and more parking. There are major dance competitions held all over the country, why not host one New Orleans? The arena is booked several months for b.b season so use the dome for major music concerts. The last few concerts that have been here were sellouts or close to it. Booking a larger venue means more $$$$. The Essence Festival is back in the dome this year. Move the Mardi Gras Balls to the dome. Even high schools could play in the dome. The new stadium could be for our Saints and them alone. They could work out, practice and play there and it would always be available to them. I know Benson would love that. Its a win win all the way. There's only one problem...
Who the hell is going to pay for it???

Hey, I got 5 on it!!!!!!!!! :p

But aren't most of the events that the Dome handles, there due to the size of the events? Large trade shows already have the massive Convention Center. Actually expanding that is being bandied about. Smaller events have the Baby Dome, and UNO stadium coming back online. The Convention Ctr in Kenner, also. Why spend a lot more money renting the Dome for smaller events, is where I'm going with this.

The Dome can host more larger Circus and Essence Fest type events, but this seems heavily dependent on the local economy being able to consistently shell out big money for Janet or Billy Joels out there capable of filling arenas. I could agree if Tulane were bringing in crowds during the fall, to help keep the Dome occupied.

Well, to keep our existing dome in play, they would have to compromise on the location of those other events.

Know what? We should've kicked Biloxi while they were down, and became Vegas South. We haven't shown any sort of penchant for luring business and jobs, so why not capitalize on our Sin City rep? That extra tourism revenue could've gone a long way towards helping solve our ills. Then, we could've diversified from there. No resistance about a new dome from me, then.