Monday, January 2, 2017

Three Things the Rays' Stadium Saga Needs in 2017

Two years ago, I wrote "Three Things the Rays Stadium Saga Needs in 2015."  Unfortunately, nobody listened to me and we're still in a confusing stalemate, because two of the three things never happened:
  1. True Regional Approach Toward the Rays (Pinellas & Hillsborough are still bidding against each other)
  2. Transparency From the Rays Regarding Money (We still have no idea how much public cash the team wants)
  3. Less Heavy-Handedness from Editorial Boards and Sports Talk Hosts (Hey, this actually happened!)
Maybe it's just that Tampa Bay now has fewer editorial boards and fewer sports talk hosts.  But the slight reprieve from regular criticisms and claims the Rays are about leave without "progress in the upcoming year" has been nice.  Especially since so many years went by without progress and the Rays haven't yet left.

How long can we enjoy this silence?  Who knows, but the Tampa Bay Times' annual editorial pleading for stadium progress was pretty mild this time around.

So my "three things the Stadium Saga needs" hasn't really changed since 2015.  Regional collaboration, transparency, and fewer political criticisms remain the path forward for anyone hoping to keep the Rays here long-term in a way that makes financial sense for the region.

2015 Times: Year of hope in Stadium Saga

2015 Times: St. Pete needs to let Rays look this year
2015 Trib: Stadium progress is hope for new year
2015 Shadow of the Stadium: Three things the debate needs this year

2014 Times: Kriseman should solve stalemate "within months"
2014 Trib/Times: Time for progress

FOLLOW: Shadow of the Stadium on Twitter
FOLLOW: Shadow of the Stadium on Facebook


  1. Hi Noah,

    Can you please share with us what a True Regional Approach Toward the Rays would look like?


  2. Trying to make something out of nothing seems to be a continuing theme of this blog...

    St.Pete & Tampa isn't competing against each other, its simply all a PR show for future votes. Plus, if housing the Rays was a losing deal like this blog suggest, then they have a weird way of expressing it...
    No need for giving run of the mill reporters anything to try to make a name for them self from spinning anything into false negativity years before concrete plans...
    And, NEWSFLASH! Stadium talk translates into more eyes & ears which means bigger ratings which equates to revenue. Sounds familiar to any hypocrites?