CSNbbs
The Official Downtown Baseball Stadium Discussion Thread - Printable Version

+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: CUSAbbs (/forum-514.html)
+---- Forum: CUSA Team Talk (/forum-432.html)
+----- Forum: UTEP (/forum-454.html)
+----- Thread: The Official Downtown Baseball Stadium Discussion Thread (/thread-635898.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18


El Paso will pay Diablos $300,000 - Fitbud - 06-02-2013 12:28 PM

The city will pay the El Paso Diablos about $300,000 when their lease of Cohen Stadium ends Oct. 1, which includes a fee to promote the future Triple-A team at the stadium through the rest of this baseball season.
The City Council on Tuesday will consider approving a mutual lease termination agreement with El Paso Professional Baseball LP, which owns the Diablos. The lease expires in April 2016, but according to city documents, the baseball club is asking to terminate its lease early.

http://www.elpasotimes.com/news/ci_23370846/el-paso-pay-diablos-300-000


RE: Baseball Stadium Costs - RUNVSFD MINER - 06-02-2013 04:38 PM

(06-02-2013 11:51 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  I'm sure the stadium will do well and attendance will be good for a while. However, as with Cohen Stadium. I don't see it being a long term success.

The Diablos' descent in leagues, affiliation, player talent, facility aging, and location, were among many factors.

Totally different situations. If you don't see the difference, then I don't think you ever will.


RE: Latest on stadium - RUNVSFD MINER - 06-02-2013 04:46 PM

(06-02-2013 11:50 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  
(06-01-2013 06:22 PM)mistabinks Wrote:  Some on council were upset because the city planner and the project manager wanted 5 additional million for contingency spending.

So what do you think the project is going to leave out of the stadium?

The Fitbud Fair-weathered Fan Bleacher Section will be left out.


RE: Latest on stadium - mistabinks - 06-02-2013 05:16 PM

(06-02-2013 11:50 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  
(06-01-2013 06:22 PM)mistabinks Wrote:  Some on council were upset because the city planner and the project manager wanted 5 additional million for contingency spending.

So what do you think the project is going to leave out of the stadium?

Who is to say anything is going to be left out. The project is not over budget. You do know what contingency spending is, right?


RE: Baseball Stadium Costs - mistabinks - 06-02-2013 05:19 PM

1913-1999. Yep, that is not long term success, lol.

Even after Jim Paul sold the team, it was still a success. So much so that an outside company came in and bought it and relocated it.

I can' fault El Paso for not being excited about independent and unaffiliated baseball.


RE: Baseball Stadium Costs - Fitbud - 06-03-2013 11:56 PM

(06-02-2013 05:19 PM)mistabinks Wrote:  1913-1999. Yep, that is not long term success, lol.

Even after Jim Paul sold the team, it was still a success. So much so that an outside company came in and bought it and relocated it.

I can' fault El Paso for not being excited about independent and unaffiliated baseball.

I"m not talking about the team. I'm talking about the stadium.


RE: Baseball Stadium Costs - Fitbud - 06-03-2013 11:59 PM

(06-02-2013 04:38 PM)RUNVSFD MINER Wrote:  
(06-02-2013 11:51 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  I'm sure the stadium will do well and attendance will be good for a while. However, as with Cohen Stadium. I don't see it being a long term success.

The Diablos' descent in leagues, affiliation, player talent, facility aging, and location, were among many factors.

Totally different situations. If you don't see the difference, then I don't think you ever will.

Really? So this new stadium isn't going to age? The affiliation with the Padres is a good one? The location is good also?

1. This stadium will age just as quickly as Cohen did.

2. The Padres aren't the greatest team in the league.

3. Many people don't like the downtown location because of traffic and parking issues.


RE: Latest on stadium - Fitbud - 06-04-2013 12:03 AM

(06-02-2013 05:16 PM)mistabinks Wrote:  
(06-02-2013 11:50 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  
(06-01-2013 06:22 PM)mistabinks Wrote:  Some on council were upset because the city planner and the project manager wanted 5 additional million for contingency spending.

So what do you think the project is going to leave out of the stadium?

Who is to say anything is going to be left out. The project is not over budget. You do know what contingency spending is, right?

From what I heard, the analysis of the soil prompted the project manager to ask for more money. Apparently, they are going to have real issues with the soil which is going to cost additional money so that is why they asked or more. Since city council said no, they said they might have to cut out some of the plans like a third deck in right field that was going to have a bar and grill.

Supposedly, there was also talk of a skywalk in that area.


RE: Latest on stadium - mistabinks - 06-04-2013 12:16 AM

Where did you hear about the issue with soil? The project manager shouldn't be held liable for that IMHO.


RE: Baseball Stadium Costs - mistabinks - 06-04-2013 12:25 AM

Many people don't like the NE location of Cohen. The Diablos would stil be a wild success had Jim Paul never sold the franchise. The success of the new franchise is not tied to the success of independent baseball.


RE: Baseball Stadium Costs - RUNVSFD MINER - 06-05-2013 01:42 AM

(06-03-2013 11:59 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  
(06-02-2013 04:38 PM)RUNVSFD MINER Wrote:  
(06-02-2013 11:51 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  I'm sure the stadium will do well and attendance will be good for a while. However, as with Cohen Stadium. I don't see it being a long term success.

The Diablos' descent in leagues, affiliation, player talent, facility aging, and location, were among many factors.

Totally different situations. If you don't see the difference, then I don't think you ever will.

Really? So this new stadium isn't going to age? The affiliation with the Padres is a good one? The location is good also?

1. This stadium will age just as quickly as Cohen did.

2. The Padres aren't the greatest team in the league.

3. Many people don't like the downtown location because of traffic and parking issues.

Geez, you keep making weak points. They are so bad, they don't even seem like responses to the previous post.

Anyway, you keep refering to "many people". Just like the handful of crazies that represented the "many people" against the ball park.

This conversation is pointless. Troll on. Maybe someone else will take the pointless bait.


Joyce is splitting and Foster makes a huge donation - mistabinks - 06-05-2013 03:35 PM

A couple of things in the news.

First, it looks like Joyce Wilson is heading to south Florida. As a city employee, I am glad as she has kicked our ass the last two contract negotiations. As a citizen, I am sad as she has actually done something to move El Paso forward.

Interestingly, maybe only to me, for the first time in the history of the EPFD, our last chief was an out of town hire. We hired someone from Florida. He stayed about three/four years and left the EPFD to become the Fire Chief of Miami. Now our City Manager is heading to South Florida. Coincidence? Probably. But it is interesting...

Also, in the interest of being transparent and accurate, it appears Paul Foster just donated 35 million to Baylor (his alma mater). I was shocked that all the FB comments were generally supportive of this. I thought the ankle biters were going to go bananas with this bit of news.


RE: Joyce is splitting and Foster makes a huge donation - RUNVSFD MINER - 06-05-2013 06:13 PM

I think she was very forward-thinking. But came across as a tyrant. Hopefully, we can land someone who can carry the torch.

Foster's donation isn't a surprise. But the amount was.


RE: Joyce is splitting and Foster makes a huge donation - randaddyminer - 06-05-2013 06:21 PM

I'm surprised he made it at this time, realignment talks must not be in Baylor's favor


RE: Joyce is splitting and Foster makes a huge donation - Fitbud - 06-06-2013 11:37 PM

Glad to see Joyce go and have no problem with Foster's donation to Baylor.

That schools football program seems to be getting better every year.


RE: Baseball Stadium Costs - Fitbud - 06-06-2013 11:39 PM

(06-05-2013 01:42 AM)RUNVSFD MINER Wrote:  
(06-03-2013 11:59 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  
(06-02-2013 04:38 PM)RUNVSFD MINER Wrote:  
(06-02-2013 11:51 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  I'm sure the stadium will do well and attendance will be good for a while. However, as with Cohen Stadium. I don't see it being a long term success.

The Diablos' descent in leagues, affiliation, player talent, facility aging, and location, were among many factors.

Totally different situations. If you don't see the difference, then I don't think you ever will.

Really? So this new stadium isn't going to age? The affiliation with the Padres is a good one? The location is good also?

1. This stadium will age just as quickly as Cohen did.

2. The Padres aren't the greatest team in the league.

3. Many people don't like the downtown location because of traffic and parking issues.

Geez, you keep making weak points. They are so bad, they don't even seem like responses to the previous post.

Anyway, you keep refering to "many people". Just like the handful of crazies that represented the "many people" against the ball park.

This conversation is pointless. Troll on. Maybe someone else will take the pointless bait.

Perhaps you don't like my arguments but the weakest argument is that only a handful of people were against building a park in the city hall location.

In case you haven't been paying attention to the mayoral race, the ballpark has basically been the issue that ruined Ortega's chances.


RE: Latest on stadium - Fitbud - 06-07-2013 12:01 AM

(06-04-2013 12:16 AM)mistabinks Wrote:  Where did you hear about the issue with soil? The project manager shouldn't be held liable for that IMHO.

It came out in ABC 7 Extra. The project manager said that the estimates never took into consideration the soil surrounding the site. In fact, because City Council insisted that they move on this immediately, there was never even a feasability evaluation taken. For this reason, there is concerns about how they are going to make the site able to support proper grass and also how they are going to deal with left field which at this point wouldn't even be 340 ft. Which is standard for professional baseball.

The project manager claims that with these issues, he would have to change some of the amenities that were included in the original rendition of the ballpark.


RE: Latest on stadium - mistabinks - 06-07-2013 01:08 AM

(06-07-2013 12:01 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  
(06-04-2013 12:16 AM)mistabinks Wrote:  Where did you hear about the issue with soil? The project manager shouldn't be held liable for that IMHO.

It came out in ABC 7 Extra. The project manager said that the estimates never took into consideration the soil surrounding the site. In fact, because City Council insisted that they move on this immediately, there was never even a feasability evaluation taken. For this reason, there is concerns about how they are going to make the site able to support proper grass and also how they are going to deal with left field which at this point wouldn't even be 340 ft. Which is standard for professional baseball.

The project manager claims that with these issues, he would have to change some of the amenities that were included in the original rendition of the ballpark.

I'll watch that episode tonight and then do my homework on it. I am surprised, if accurate, no other media outlets have picked up on the story.


RE: Baseball Stadium Costs - mistabinks - 06-07-2013 01:27 AM

(06-06-2013 11:39 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Perhaps you don't like my arguments but the weakest argument is that only a handful of people were against building a park in the city hall location.

Thousands showed up for the pro ball park rallies.

Tens of people showed up for the anti ball park rally.

I will grant that the people against the ballpark have been louder in the media.

(06-06-2013 11:39 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  In case you haven't been paying attention to the mayoral race, the ballpark has basically been the issue that ruined Ortega's chances.

That is your opinion.

Something to chew on. How could Props 1 and 2 pass by such a large margin if the majority of people aren't willing to spend to move El Paso forward?

How come thousands of people showed up to support the ballpark but only tens of people showed up to protest it?

How come MountainStar has so far sold out all of their events?

You see the ballpark as a big overall issue. You are entitled to that opinion. My differs. Leeser is a popular man in El Paso. Ortega is paying for the sins of an unpopular (at times) Joyce Wilson. I think that is why the election went the way it did. That being said, I think Oscar has screwed the pooch by not being aggressive. I think the run off is going to be a lot closer than novices think.


The Official Downtown Baseball Stadium Discussion Thread - mistabinks - 06-07-2013 01:51 AM

Okay, after re-reviewing some bookmarked articles, watching a few online segments, and going back through some old stuff, here is my opinion on where we are at.

Because of the time crunch, the City of El Paso agreed to build a stadium for MountainStar by first pitch 2014. We made that commitment with no firm design plans. That was last year. Even today, we still do not have a final design plan.

In my opinion only, if somebody wants to ***** and moan about something, not having a final design plan is it.

That being said, how can a sensible person say we are over budget if an actual design plan is not completed. One would be terribly incorrect if they say certain aspects of the stadium are being tossed out because we are over budget.

-There is no official design. You cannot throw out an item if there is not concrete and official design that shows that item in the plans.

-Only 20% of the stadium has gone to bid. You can't be over budget if you don't know what the other 80% is going to cost.

Right now, regardless of how loud the squeaky wheel is, right now the only official status is we are going to spend 52.8 million on a baseball stadium. Nothing else is official.