https://bhamnow.com/2018/04/02/birmingha...ll-oquinn/

Still trying to weasel out of it. He voted no because he heard from a bunch of people in Druid Hills that they don't want it. Fine. I don't agree with that, but it's a perfectly reasonable position to have. Have the courage of standing up and saying it, though. We all know if it had been delayed a week or a month the vote would have still been the same. At this point, it doesn't matter. It passed. It's weird how trying to be against something your opponents were for has aligned the council

I have no hard feelings against him. He did what he was elected to do, listen to his constituents.

(04-02-2018 01:32 PM)rook360 Wrote:  I have no hard feelings against him. He did what he was elected to do, listen to his constituents.

If they all did that, it would have failed!

(04-02-2018 01:36 PM)Bham Blazer Wrote:  

(04-02-2018 01:32 PM)rook360 Wrote:  I have no hard feelings against him. He did what he was elected to do, listen to his constituents.

If they all did that, it would have failed!

Maybe that should tell us something. Darrell was trying to get the concerns of his constituents answered and wanted more transparency (which is the platform that Woodfin ran on) and he got neither of those.

Objectively, his vote made sense for the people of D5, particularly the ones affected by the stadium.

(04-02-2018 01:36 PM)Bham Blazer Wrote:  

(04-02-2018 01:32 PM)rook360 Wrote:  I have no hard feelings against him. He did what he was elected to do, listen to his constituents.

If they all did that, it would have failed!

As much as I like a new stadium for UAB those people have just as much a right to be heard.

By the time the stadium came to a vote, the die was cast. It was only a choice between the BJCC stadium and nothing (unless one considers maintaining Legion Field as the only venue for another several decades a choice). Any other choice was no longer on the table for B'ham. It is not entirely B'ham's fault that it is now committed to being limited to attracting only the lower tier of athletic events and conventions for the future. The costs of building anything more capable exceeded the vision of the state and metro area voters.

Now I hope they expedite building the new stadium for the sake of UAB football, perhaps its only regular tenant. The new 45,000 seat stadium is what many UAB fans said they wanted and is likely the size they will get for many years. We won't know about what fan-centric "bells and whistles" will be provided until final funding and design is secured.

(04-02-2018 02:38 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  By the time the stadium came to a vote, the die was cast. It was only a choice between the BJCC stadium and nothing (unless one considers maintaining Legion Field as the only venue for another several decades a choice). Any other choice was no longer on the table for B'ham. It is not entirely B'ham's fault that it is now committed to being limited to attracting only the lower tier of athletic events and conventions for the future. The costs of building anything more capable exceeded the vision of the state and metro area voters.

Now I hope they expedite building the new stadium for the sake of UAB football, perhaps its only regular tenant. The new 45,000 seat stadium is what many UAB fans said they wanted and is likely the size they will get for many years. We won't know about what fan-centric "bells and whistles" will be provided until final funding and design is secured.

The people of Druid Hills weren't against it because it wasn't a 75,000 seat dome

(04-02-2018 03:59 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(04-02-2018 02:38 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  By the time the stadium came to a vote, the die was cast. It was only a choice between the BJCC stadium and nothing (unless one considers maintaining Legion Field as the only venue for another several decades a choice). Any other choice was no longer on the table for B'ham. It is not entirely B'ham's fault that it is now committed to being limited to attracting only the lower tier of athletic events and conventions for the future. The costs of building anything more capable exceeded the vision of the state and metro area voters.

Now I hope they expedite building the new stadium for the sake of UAB football, perhaps its only regular tenant. The new 45,000 seat stadium is what many UAB fans said they wanted and is likely the size they will get for many years. We won't know about what fan-centric "bells and whistles" will be provided until final funding and design is secured.

The people of Druid Hills weren't against it because it wasn't a 75,000 seat dome

Perhaps they would have been FOR it had it been a 75.000 seat dome since the 1998 MAPS vote within the city was in favor of it. It really didn't matter since the vote was between two limited choices. Now we wait to see just exactly what we will get for the money and when we will get it.

(04-02-2018 05:31 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  

(04-02-2018 03:59 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(04-02-2018 02:38 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  By the time the stadium came to a vote, the die was cast. It was only a choice between the BJCC stadium and nothing (unless one considers maintaining Legion Field as the only venue for another several decades a choice). Any other choice was no longer on the table for B'ham. It is not entirely B'ham's fault that it is now committed to being limited to attracting only the lower tier of athletic events and conventions for the future. The costs of building anything more capable exceeded the vision of the state and metro area voters.

Now I hope they expedite building the new stadium for the sake of UAB football, perhaps its only regular tenant. The new 45,000 seat stadium is what many UAB fans said they wanted and is likely the size they will get for many years. We won't know about what fan-centric "bells and whistles" will be provided until final funding and design is secured.

The people of Druid Hills weren't against it because it wasn't a 75,000 seat dome

Perhaps they would have been FOR it had it been a 75.000 seat dome since the 1998 MAPS vote within the city was in favor of it. It really didn't matter since the vote was between two limited choices. Now we wait to see just exactly what we will get for the money and when we will get it.

Did you watch the town hall meeting? Because if you didn't watch the town hall meeting, then you can't comment on what the people at the town hall meetings thoughts were. Based on your comments, I'm going to say you didn't...in which case, I'm going to ignore your talking points on this.

(04-02-2018 05:31 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  

(04-02-2018 03:59 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(04-02-2018 02:38 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  By the time the stadium came to a vote, the die was cast. It was only a choice between the BJCC stadium and nothing (unless one considers maintaining Legion Field as the only venue for another several decades a choice). Any other choice was no longer on the table for B'ham. It is not entirely B'ham's fault that it is now committed to being limited to attracting only the lower tier of athletic events and conventions for the future. The costs of building anything more capable exceeded the vision of the state and metro area voters.

Now I hope they expedite building the new stadium for the sake of UAB football, perhaps its only regular tenant. The new 45,000 seat stadium is what many UAB fans said they wanted and is likely the size they will get for many years. We won't know about what fan-centric "bells and whistles" will be provided until final funding and design is secured.

The people of Druid Hills weren't against it because it wasn't a 75,000 seat dome

Perhaps they would have been FOR it had it been a 75.000 seat dome since the 1998 MAPS vote within the city was in favor of it. It really didn't matter since the vote was between two limited choices. Now we wait to see just exactly what we will get for the money and when we will get it.

I have never been more sure of anything in my life that they would have still been against it if it had been a 75,000 seat domed stadium.

Almost as if people are against progress.

(04-02-2018 05:43 PM)demiveeman Wrote:  

(04-02-2018 05:31 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  

(04-02-2018 03:59 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(04-02-2018 02:38 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  By the time the stadium came to a vote, the die was cast. It was only a choice between the BJCC stadium and nothing (unless one considers maintaining Legion Field as the only venue for another several decades a choice). Any other choice was no longer on the table for B'ham. It is not entirely B'ham's fault that it is now committed to being limited to attracting only the lower tier of athletic events and conventions for the future. The costs of building anything more capable exceeded the vision of the state and metro area voters.

Now I hope they expedite building the new stadium for the sake of UAB football, perhaps its only regular tenant. The new 45,000 seat stadium is what many UAB fans said they wanted and is likely the size they will get for many years. We won't know about what fan-centric "bells and whistles" will be provided until final funding and design is secured.

The people of Druid Hills weren't against it because it wasn't a 75,000 seat dome

Perhaps they would have been FOR it had it been a 75.000 seat dome since the 1998 MAPS vote within the city was in favor of it. It really didn't matter since the vote was between two limited choices. Now we wait to see just exactly what we will get for the money and when we will get it.

Did you watch the town hall meeting? Because if you didn't watch the town hall meeting, then you can't comment on what the people at the town hall meetings thoughts were. Based on your comments, I'm going to say you didn't...in which case, I'm going to ignore your talking points on this.

You mean you don't already ignore his talking points?

(04-02-2018 06:09 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  Almost as if people are against progress.

There is no “almost” to it. There are people against progress and afraid of change. Go figure!

(04-02-2018 06:43 PM)KevMo4UAB Wrote:  

(04-02-2018 06:09 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  Almost as if people are against progress.

There is no “almost” to it. There are people against progress and afraid of change. Go figure!

It is probable that many of those folks who are in favor of progress and unafraid of change are the ones who have had the initiative to leave this state and move to more progressive states for career opportunities. Just take a look at the number of former UAB Blazer grads here on this forum who are today living in other states.

(04-02-2018 08:01 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  

(04-02-2018 06:43 PM)KevMo4UAB Wrote:  

(04-02-2018 06:09 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  Almost as if people are against progress.

There is no “almost” to it. There are people against progress and afraid of change. Go figure!

It is probable that many of those folks who are in favor of progress and unafraid of change are the ones who have had the initiative to leave this state and move to more progressive states for career opportunities. Just take a look at the number of former UAB Blazer grads here on this forum who are today living in other states.

I guess a broken clock *is* right occasionally

(04-02-2018 08:03 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(04-02-2018 08:01 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  

(04-02-2018 06:43 PM)KevMo4UAB Wrote:  

(04-02-2018 06:09 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  Almost as if people are against progress.

There is no “almost” to it. There are people against progress and afraid of change. Go figure!

It is probable that many of those folks who are in favor of progress and unafraid of change are the ones who have had the initiative to leave this state and move to more progressive states for career opportunities. Just take a look at the number of former UAB Blazer grads here on this forum who are today living in other states.

I guess a broken clock *is* right occasionally

What is to be said about slower running clocks that are always behind time and may NEVER be right, even occasionally.

It’s a shame we won’t ever likely see a consolidated City-County government, which has benefitted other cities in the “New South.”

The 1901 Constitution is also a huge thorn in the side of progress. The stadium should have never gone before the state legislature to begin win.

(04-02-2018 05:46 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  I have never been more sure of anything in my life that they would have still been against it if it had been a 75,000 seat domed stadium.

I'll take that bet.

Especially b/c the Druid Hills Neighborhood Association spoke and said specifically that they were against it BECAUSE IT WASN'T the 75k domed stadium. Like, very specifically used those words.

(04-02-2018 06:43 PM)KevMo4UAB Wrote:  

(04-02-2018 06:09 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  Almost as if people are against progress.

There is no “almost” to it. There are people against progress and afraid of change. Go figure!

Only against progress in Birmingham....the long arms of the machine 50 miles southwest of Birmingham. But the city council passed measure so on to the next hurdle. I don't believe we've seen the last of this passive aggressive resistance from those looking to throw a wrench into the process.