Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
As someone who was at least moderately opposed to funding a new arena with taxpayer dollars, I don't really understand what anyone is doing wasting their time complaining now. The ship has sailed, you've been left behind, so you can either catch up and enjoy the journey with everyone else or sit on your little island and keep complaining with nobody around to hear you. If the money is all but spent, I'm gonna go ahead and catch up to the ship.
The value of the stadium itself seems neglible, if you're looking at the value difference between just keeping the saddledome and upgrading to something new. But the big issue is obviously that option A comes with the consequence of losing the Flames. It's a business, remember, and they will go where they can maximize their returns.
If Calgary lost the Flames, we'd instantly become the biggest city in North America without a major sports team. Austin doesn't have one either, but they have a big handful of amateur teams across multiple sports and the kind of cultural reputation any city would be lucky to have. Without the Flames, what's left for Calgary? Nothing much, unfortunately. Maybe one day we'll be something special, but not today. So there's no argument to me that the Flames value isn't tremendous to a city that culturally revolves around the Flames for most of the year. Even if you can't afford to go to games (most can, once a year at least) they're still a valuable part of our life.
|
What’s left for Calgary without the flames? This pretty much says it all on this debate.
Look I understand why its being funded and built. However this notion that its a benefit for the masses is total bunk