Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Stadium opposition

  1. #1
    All League
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Middle of New Jersey
    Posts
    2,966
    I'm in the middle of packing to move, havent been able to keep up with JI stuff so if this is out there already, sorry.

    Heard the commercials in NY area about what a disaster this stadium is going to be with traffic etc..

    They have a web site for the anti-stadium, www.newyorkabc.org

    Looks like this wont be an easy fight for NY Jets and company..

  2. #2
    Jets Insider Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    14,874
    Yeah, pretty ironic, a cabby b*tiching about traffic. For the pro-stadium outlook, click the link in my sig. They also offer links to anti-stadium sites.

  3. #3
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,516
    Originally posted by JumbalayaJet@Jun 24 2004, 12:37 PM
    Yeah, pretty ironic, a cabby b*tiching about traffic. For the pro-stadium outlook, click the link in my sig. They also offer links to anti-stadium sites.
    I don't get it. Why would a pro-stadium site offer links to the anti-stadium site? If people are so against having a stadium built in our backyard, let them find the site they're happy with, no?

  4. #4
    Jets Insider Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    14,874
    Because they don't want to appear slanted in their arguments. "Here's what everyone is saying: how can it be wrong? We won't have to decide for you."

  5. #5
    Board Moderator
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    nyc
    Posts
    11,751
    newyorkgames.org also has pro- and anti- links, they have various stances on the various parts of the project.

  6. #6
    All League
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    220a, Row 12
    Posts
    4,197
    Originally posted by isired@Jun 24 2004, 03:45 PM
    newyorkgames.org also has pro- and anti- links, they have various stances on the various parts of the project.
    newyorkgames.org is basically anti-stadium.

    http://www.westsidejets.com is pro.

    BZ

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    41,582
    The folks on the West Side are just a bunch of middle-aged counter-culture jerks who are always lookin for something to protest ... sort of relive their youth

    I put ZERO CREDENCE in anything these radicals scream about

  8. #8
    Board Moderator
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    nyc
    Posts
    11,751
    Originally posted by BwanaZulia+Jun 24 2004, 02:54 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (BwanaZulia @ Jun 24 2004, 02:54 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
    Originally posted by isired@Jun 24 2004, 03:45 PM
    newyorkgames.org also has pro- and anti- links, they have various stances on the various parts of the project.
    newyorkgames.org is basically anti-stadium.

    http://www.westsidejets.com is pro.

    BZ[/b]

    true... from their home page:
    <!--QuoteBegin--NewYorkGames.org

    New York could stage the greatest Olympics ever, and benefit from the seven magical years of being the designated host city.

    However, contrary to International Olympic Committee guidance, the proposed Manhattan Olympics would be:As with our previous Olympic bids and world&#39;s fairs, Queens should host the New York Olympics.

    As for the West Side:
    • a Javits expansion must happen; but
      the stadium should go to Flushing,
      (though Shea should be the Olympic stadium)
      the subway should go to Second Avenue, and
      the office towers should go to the WTC site.
    [/quote]
    NewYorkGames.org

  9. #9
    All League
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    220a, Row 12
    Posts
    4,197
    Originally posted by isired@Jun 24 2004, 04:51 PM
    NewYorkGames.org
    From what I have read, he basically believes that the entire 2012 NYC Olympic Bid is way to costly and complicated and that he believes that they are looking for much more simple plans.

    Of course, hosting the 2012 Olympics is not simple and I think the plan is pretty well thought out. Really, though, without the stadium there is no plan.

    BZ

  10. #10
    Board Moderator
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    nyc
    Posts
    11,751
    Originally posted by BwanaZulia+Jun 24 2004, 04:21 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (BwanaZulia @ Jun 24 2004, 04:21 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--isired@Jun 24 2004, 04:51 PM
    NewYorkGames.org
    From what I have read, he basically believes that the entire 2012 NYC Olympic Bid is way to costly and complicated and that he believes that they are looking for much more simple plans.

    Of course, hosting the 2012 Olympics is not simple and I think the plan is pretty well thought out. Really, though, without the stadium there is no plan.

    BZ[/b][/quote]
    "he" was a big part of putting together the bid & games as deputy mayor of salt lake city... i have read (on that site and in the NY press) that the IOC prefers shea b/c it eliminates controversy/lack of support, transportation probs (the "x" is not popular) and cost. i think the plan as it stands now includes shea, unless they just added west side stadium in the last proposal...

  11. #11
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    18,349
    we need an NY stadium for an NY team.

    the stadium gives our economy jobs which it desperately needs, and most people using the stadium will be using mass-transit anyway

    the only people whining about it are whining about spending tax money, thats all they care about.

  12. #12
    Board Moderator
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    nyc
    Posts
    11,751
    Originally posted by abraham-94@Jun 24 2004, 05:41 PM
    the only people whining about it are whining about spending tax money, thats all they care about.
    that&#39;s only partially true. most who are opposed to the stadium feel that way b/c the non-taxpayer-funded options for more traditional development offer many more jobs and tax revenue (the &#39;stadium as job source&#39; is a fallacy, the permanent staff at the meadowlands is 100 for 2 nfl teams - a statistical 0 for the value of resources committed).

    many more people support the use of taxpayer money to expand javits, and have been for more than a decade, which seems like it will truly be an indirect source for city income via additional business on a reliable, frequent basis.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us