So maybe this is short-sighted and/or selfish: Either fix up RFK or build the new one at Poplar Point, BUT for the love of buddha's bouncing bumper-nuts, don't let Maryland have it.

Goat Boy: They've been a draw for the last 11 years and they are only improving. So, I think these guys are going to be around for awhile. DC has really good attendance numbers.

My read on this is that the Redskins deal for RFK isn't dead yet. Fenty, who wants DC United to stay, needs to make room for Dan Snyder to completely destroy the fabric of the eastern Capitol Hill community. Thus Poplar Point becomes a possibility again. Regardless of the fact that PP is home to some actually functioning wetlands and some "rare for the region" plants.

I can't wait until the Rosedale community fights Dan Snyder.

$350 million? For a SOCCER stadium? That's like $10,000 per fan! Give me a break.

"That's like $10,000 per fan"

Some of those Latino fans are pretty hot, so I'd say subsidizing them at $10,000 is worth it. I'd get more use out of that then I'd get out of most DC-subsidized projects.

But for my $10,000 per I'd like a say in who gets to show up for matches, how much they are wearing, etc.

It's not $350 million for the soccer stadium, it's for development and infrastructure for the site. In order for ANYTHING to be built at Poplar Point, services (plumbing, electric, roads, park space, etc.) need to be added to make it viable. The stadium itself will cost significantly less - and at one point, the owners of DC United proposed to pay for that themselves leaving the infrastructure development to the city.

"developing a community of sporting venues and facilities so that DC can maybe host an Olympic games someday -- and better yet, without having to go in on the hosting with Baltimore."

Getting OT, but an Olympics is a gigantic event and there's no way 10 sq. mile DC would be able to do it on their own.

Ugh please don't make DCU move to Maryland.

One other point - DCist readers are constantly saying they don't have a good outdoor music venue with good Metro access in DC. Well, wouldn't this stadium fill that need?

Yeah -- if U2, The Rolling Stones, and Aerosmith are the only bands that play here.

Just to handle soccer during the Olympics requires a regional presence. For 1996 Atlanta games, RFK held a 5 matches (Miami, Birmingham, Orlando and Athens Ga were the other venues). And I think we are going to need Baltimore for such events like sailing.

Whatever the case. DC lost its 2012 bid, Chicago is the US choice for 2016. And if Chicago doesn't get it we might have a shot at 2020. If Chicago does get it, you can forget about it till 2036.

We need a Jell-O Wrestling League stadium next. And an Ultimate Fighter League stadium. And a Rock-Paper-Scissors League stadium.

"yes the united have local support and so do some of the other clubs; but let's face it, overall the level of play in the league is just not very good. watch a premier league match, hell, even one of the lesser euro leagues, and compare them with what goes on on the pitch over here."

Isn't local support what we want? Teams in Europe, especially in the Prem, complain about foreign fans who don't know a thing about supporting a local team.

The level of play argument is also a little bit suspect. By your logic every league not in Europe should just pack it in.

Apparently, I AM in the mood for a pro-soccer argument. I hate that.

clap, clap, clap clap clap. DC United!

OY! The original $350m was not for the stadium itself but for the infrastructure necessary to make Poplar Point a workable location... infrastructure folks, is roads, water, sewage, gas, etc...not a stadium.

No matter what goes on that site, stadium, houses, retail, whatever, it's going to need PUBLIC FUNDS for INFRASTRUCTURE....

For the love of God, PLEASE FIX THE SCHOOLS!!!!

strange that i am pro-soccer but making the anti-soccer argument. nonetheless....

the difference between america and the rest of the globe is that we have world class athletes in multiple major sports. if you go see baseball, basketball, football, or hockey there is no doubt you are going to see excellence. compare the level of talent in the aforementioned to the level of talent in mls. the soccer players we have here simply do not measure up. period. nobody can argue that. how can there possibly be a sustained level of interest in a league mired in mediocrity when everywhere else you look you are seeing superstars? if i have to choose between spending my money on mlb tix vs mls, well, it's not even a choice.

@ heckle: the inferior euro leagues have support because they are the only game in town. same in south america. its soccer or its nothing, so of course people choose soccer. here we have almost too many choice for a soccer league to be successful, considered a major sport, or worthy of gigantic public investment.

all that said - fifa 08 for ps3 is the fucking bomb.

Whether gold, silver, or bronze at the closing...
you'll make your country proud by competing sans-clothing.

Happy Valentine's Day!

adamsmorgan wrote:

OY! The original $350m was not for the stadium itself but for the infrastructure necessary to make Poplar Point a workable location... infrastructure folks, is roads, water, sewage, gas, etc...not a stadium.

No matter what goes on that site, stadium, houses, retail, whatever, it's going to need PUBLIC FUNDS for INFRASTRUCTURE....
------------------------------------------

Exactly.

One way or another DC is going to pony up big money to assist in the development of Poplar Point. The real question here is: What kind of deal will be struck between DCU and the city? Is the city going to get raped again (à la MLB) or will it be a fair deal that benefits the city, Ward 8 and DCU?

Don't be so simplistic, people. We have no details on this deal yet. Get informed first...and then complain.

"The tax for the baseball stadium is one less potential tax increase for another, more worthy project. The same goes for the soccer stadium -- if a tax is levied to pay for the city's share, that's one less tax that can be used for something else."

Nonsense.

The business community welcomed this tax because they realized that it would lower their tax burden in the long run, and because they wanted to be in a city with a national baseball presence, as this is of use to the business community. The tax revenue from the area around the ballpark will far exceed $611 million.

So in the end this will probably actually lower taxes on businesses and the general public alike (albeit the 'lowering' will probably be in the form of no new taxes, not lowering of existing tax).

The real tax that would make businesses leave DC is the tripling of their real estate taxes. The impact of that is probably 50 times larger than the fairly miniscule baseball stadium tax.

Re: voteprime

You are completely correct on all accounts!!! A DC United match at RFK is like nothing else in pro-sports. I've been to my fair share of baseball games (which I am a big fan of) and some NFL games, but the atmosphere when you sit in Sections 135/136/137 (shameless Barra Brava plug) is incredible! Last year was my first season watching soccer and I can't wait for the season to start again!

@voteprime: yea, i'm the one with no evidence. yet your post is full of "ifs" and "maybes." give me a break.

in my experience at rfk for soccer, the "atmosphere" is totally contrived. people are trying to desperately to replicate the experience of being at a euro league match, and that's just something they can't do. are these people enjoying themselves? sure. but there's hardly anything organic or authentic about it. if american soccer wants to succeed it needs to brand itself accordingly, as a uniquely american experience that will bring in new fans. knowing people who work for mls marketing, i can tell you that they are not going down that road.

and how is the level of play going to get better if US teams don't have the money to bring over a ton of superstars? answer: it isn't.

is going to a united game fun? sure. but is joe schmo who has never dribbled a ball or tried to do a rainbow going to sit down and learn the game? unlikely. you did, and that's great. but you're the exception, not the rule.

Hillman,

Read the most recent Post article on the soccer stadium:

"In a private meeting with the D.C. Council yesterday, Fenty (D) said the District has been collecting $20 million a year in excess revenue from city taxes related to the financing of the baseball stadium, the sources said.

Fenty said the city could use that revenue to pay for construction bonds for a 27,000-seat soccer stadium for United, said the sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the discussion was private. Such a plan could prove controversial in the business community, which has been paying additional taxes since 2004 toward the baseball project. The District instead could choose to use the excess tax money to retire the 30-year baseball stadium bonds early, city officials said."

Taxes are taxes, period, and no one likes more taxes.

"the inferior euro leagues have support because they are the only game in town."

What a joke.. soccer is the only sport in Europe? Just cause we don't get them here doesn't mean they don't exist. Your argument also assumes that a fan prefers all sports equally. Not everyone likes baseball, just like not everyone likes soccer.

"if american soccer wants to succeed it needs to brand itself accordingly, as a uniquely american experience that will bring in new fans."

Stated as a fact.. but I don't necessarily understand the rationale. Soccer is a sport played by the same rules worldwide.. I'm not sure what you could do to it to make it a "uniquely american experience". Does soccer have a stigma to overcome? Yes, but for many people that stigma is overcome simply by attending a game. Soccer will never rival the NFL or probably even the NHL for that matter, but that doesn't mean it can't be successful.

But I do have a couple reservations about this plan. First, if the business community signed on to this tax thinking it was only for the Nats stadium then I don't think it's right to shift funds without the business community's support.

Second, we'd have to make damn sure the plan will encourage development around the stadium as much as possible.

Third - we need to demand some decent architecture. This is going to be something we're stuck with for decades. We need to demand decent architecture, both for the stadium and the adjacent developments.

Fourth - we need some public marinas included.

it's funny to see people act as if mls is wildly successful and popular from coast to coast, and that all of the players are pele clones. i must be living in an alternate universe where 99.99% of the american population doesn't give a flying fuck about soccer. but you are all right, mls should continue as is, on its obvious and unstoppable path to US sports domination.

kas: you quote me saying "in my experience at rfk for soccer," so, OBVIOUSLY, i've been there for a DCU match. RIF.

voteprime and politburo: i think we can agree that the current incarnation of the soccer experience is lacking for the vast vast majority of the american public. i'm not saying the game itself has to change, but something has to be done to increase interest or the league is doomed. do i know what that is? no. but it isn't my job to.

kr: there's a different between "tradition" (take me out to the ballgame) and "co-option" (the soccer hooligan gimick).

goat boy: I did was quote you, but I wanted to make sure you actually went to a match where DC United actually played.

uhm i probably go to two caps games per season, when my rangers are in town.

ok, sorry goat boy.....

but on the other hand, do not change the game, we saw what happened in 96 with stupid american rules......the thing is theres other sports, unlike most os europe, so most of the peeps who come out are hardcore, or families, so you need to market to both. eventually we will be a top 3 sport, weve pretty much passed hockey (they changed that game, now it sucks) about to pass NBA soo to be NBA europe)

we already are attended and watched more by dc area then those 2 sports now!

ok this has been great, but i really need to get some actual work done today. so, in closing...

we've gotten really far away from the original question at hand: is building a new, dedicated soccer stadium with public funds a good idea? unless you can prove empirically that over the next 10 or 20 years that this would be a worthwhile and stable investment - and i don't think you can - then dc shouldn't invest the hundreds of millions of dollars that could be better spent elsewhere. sure soccer may turn it around and pass hockey in terms of popularity, but i don't see it ever passing football, baseball, or basketball. i think at best you would have to estimate the chances of long-term mls success at around 50/50. this city simply has too much that needs to be fixed to move forward with such a risky proposition.

go red bulls!

Given that there's no actual proposal for developing a stadium with public funds other than a vague suggestion being floated around the media today, I don't know what there is to discuss. No one knows what the actual terms would be.

From DCU's standpoint, they either need to own the stadium or have a very favorable lease in order to make it work. I doubt the city would pay to build the stadium *and* do that for them, so it seems like a non-starter. In the past the team were willing to build the stadium themselves, although I don't know if that's still on the table since it wouldn't be connected with Poplar Point development rights.

to goatboy:

While sense you are making a good argument, there are a few aspects that worry me.

One, you argue that Euro leagues are far superior, but have you been to a match in Europe? Perhaps a game that didn't involve the likes of Manchester U, Real Madrid, the Arsenal, etc? A real European football match? If not you are comparing a game you experience via a video game or television versus an actual event.

Two, why do you think college football and college basketball have become so popular in recent year? Perhaps it is because the public is sick and tired of seeing over paid athletes act like pre-madonas or superstars. I have been to both Euro matches and I am a season ticket holder for DCU. I would take a DCU game any day. The atmosphere is great and not contrived but rather adopted from the European style due to the extreme diversity of the fans in attendance.

Three, Soccer is not a truly American sport and thank God it isn't. American sports follow the ideals of Americans...Capitalist motivation. I would rather watch players (aging and unknown alike) play a game for love than for a 10 year contract or Nike deal any day.

Four, Beckham, Donovan, Angel, Blanco (shudder), and in the near future Henry and possible Zadane are not stars? I must have missed something over the past three World Cups then?

Five, Growth is a problem....Then I guess San Jose and next Years Seattle as well as the restart of Woman's Major League Soccer in 2009 must be a really elaborate rumor of the Internet.

sure soccer may turn it around and pass hockey in terms of popularity

Much as I agree with your previous argument, I'm afraid that train already left the station.