Jump to content

The Jets need to move on from MetLife.


johnnyjet
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Copernicus said:

I would add that it is not just about sharing a stadium but more location. Met Life Stadium happens to be located in such barren landscape of NJ. In that parking lot it looks as if you are on an island in the middle of swamp land with seemingly little example of human life. There is just no feel to it. If you think that doesn't play a role in wins and losses you are mistaken. I would not set foot in Met Life Stadium with free parking and tickets. Just an awful atmosphere and experience

It is remote .... but its not disgusting .. especially in the autumn.  The reeds from the swamp are actually quite attractive.  Plus on a brisk windy day the beautiful aromas from Bayonne can be relished. 😄

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Dunnie said:

Cmon ... I have worked in manhattan for the past 25 years ... the reality is politics squashed this deal ... nothing else. It was approved before silver just stomped it out.   As far as parking ... there would be NO parking.  Tailgates would have been in jersey or around manhattan bars.  But that would not have made it any less amazing.   That stadium would have catapulted the Jets as a destination event.... like SoFi.

I'm not saying what squashed the deal.  I'm saying that in time, Jets fans would have been very unhappy.  Some immediately, when they saw what tickets/PSLs would cost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

IF Woody ever sells, maybe it would happen - but the Johnson's are never moving.

Not a lot of decent potential locations left for a new owner.

Aqueduct has the room but the Belt Parkway is the only way to get there, and that would be a nightmare. It's already a nightmare.

Maybe if Nassau County decides to knock down the Coliseum, the Hub - but that's probably too small of an area. Maybe with a 50k stadium it could work. But they keep making that land smaller and smaller.

Suffolk County? Not ideal for the tri state.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

I could be wrong but the prices at MetLife and MSG are in line. Most stadium experiences you’re getting a 11-$12 beer and  6 bucks for a hot dog.

For concessions, maybe?  But, it's definitely cheaper to go to a Jets game than a Rangers/Knicks game right now.

I'd also expect higher prices here than MSG.  MSG hosts 82 home games typically.  The WSS would host 10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Adoni Beast said:

 

My only thing is if we are sharing a stadium and cutting the cost + expenses...how do we NOT have an amazing stadium to share?

 

 

When two ownership groups can't agree on architectural design and seating capacity, you end up with Met Life Stadium.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ZachEY said:

For concessions, maybe?  But, it's definitely cheaper to go to a Jets game than a Rangers/Knicks game right now.

I'd also expect higher prices here than MSG.  MSG hosts 82 home games typically.  The WSS would host 10.

I’d say that’s because of the team not the city.    Just as a comparison is much more expensive to go to a sporting event in Tampa than it is in NY - Bucs or Lightning. It’s annoying, but winners dictate pricing I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, TheNuuFaaolaExperience said:

Give me a competitive team and I wouldn't care if we played in a replica of Shea Stadium.

Please no!!!!  Shea Stadium is a bad memory.  I hated going to that stadium.  Of course, many happy memories there though.  And many bad memories there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, ZachEY said:

I don't see how that makes any sense at all.  They're going to cut capacity for TV aesthetics?  So, 1/3 less ticket sales for the occasional wide shot w/ a graphic over it?  Seems like a losing idea.  Additionally, these NFL stadiums are only NFL stadiums 10 days a year - a drop in the bucket.  The rest of the time they are mega event spaces - concerts, monster trucks, etc.  That's why I say LI getting one doesn't make sense.  You don't need two mega-venues that close to each other.  Especially when you've already got 2 baseball stadiums, and three arenas in addition to Metlife, all within 30 minutes of each other.  That's why Dolan fought the WSS - competition for the Garden, no?  But, I still don't see a path to saying, let me sell less tickets.

IDK, it seems like newer stadiums are smaller and cater more toward corporate events. The new Dallas stadium, LA stadium, and Vegas stadiums are all smaller than metlife at 80k, 70k, and 65k. Maybe that's too small of a sample size to really tell a trend?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Rangers9 said:

I always thought it makes a lot a sense for Jets and Giants to share a stadium. Why build an extra 2 billion building for only 8 home dates. As for Met Life being terrible what’s wrong with it. It’s modern comfortable and has all of the amenities. And there’s a train station on site. 

It has no amenities outside the gates.  Is a pita to get to, parking sucks, traffic sucks and the place has zero personality. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, TokyoJetsFan said:

It was called Giants Stadium and they played there for a good 8 years before the Jets moved in . They absolutely had their own stadium. 

The seats were red and blue too.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, jmat321 said:

Queens is not happening.  It’s just not accessible enough for the NFL.  MetLife is right in the heart of the NE/I85 Corridor.  Easily accessible from Boston, Philly, Baltimore, DC, Upstate, etc.  It’s a great location for traveling fans. 
 

I do think that the NFL may approach the Johnsons, or maybe they already have, about opting out in 2025. Possibly a London move, with some financial compensation from the league.     

It’s not easily accessible from anywhere but Jersey. It’s sucks for traveling fans. I’ve been to over half the nfl stadiums.  This one is close to the worst. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Matt39 said:

I’d say that’s because of the team not the city.    Just as a comparison is much more expensive to go to a sporting event in Tampa than it is in NY - Bucs or Lightning. It’s annoying, but winners dictate pricing I guess.

Maybe... The Knicks were expensive when they were terrible.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, johnnyjet said:

It’s not easily accessible from anywhere but Jersey. It’s sucks for traveling fans. I’ve been to over half the nfl stadiums.  This one is close to the worst. 

Another W for the Johnson Bros.  Spend $1.5B to build one of the very worst stadiums in the NFL.  Yet they still make a fortune off of owning this team.  I have to again give credit to the poster (wish I could remember which one) who said that this is the only job that these 2 buffoons can do in a successful way (financially successful, that is).  Basically it's a job that can't be failed at.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Dcat said:

please explain how a new venue would solve the problem illustrated below?  We need a new owner way more than a  new venue, although it would be nice.

3ua06twe15b81.png?width=640&crop=smart&a

This is an absolute disgrace. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, UntouchableCrew said:

MetLife is probably the worst "modern" NFL stadium -- but who cares.

The product on the field is what matters.

And that's also one of the worst.  Tied for the worst record in the NFL over the past 5 years.  (with the other inhabitants of MetLife Stadium)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ZachEY said:

For concessions, maybe?  But, it's definitely cheaper to go to a Jets game than a Rangers/Knicks game right now.

I'd also expect higher prices here than MSG.  MSG hosts 82 home games typically.  The WSS would host 10.

That's where the politics came into it too.  For the WSS to work it had to be a 'Convention Center' also, which stepped on Javits Center toes.  So it cascaded down the line getting to the point where it wasn't feasible paying out all the bribes and such to make sure everything went smoothly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, JetsFanatic said:

The Lakers and Clippers share an arena. The Chargers and Rams share a stadium.  Also the Jets and Giants are equal partners so I just named five other professional teams that share a stadium.

It used to be that the Football and Baseball teams used the same stadium, so we had the horrific hellholes in Pittsburgh and Cincinnati and Oakland and St. Louis and Baltimore and Houston and Queens and wherever else a "Memorial Coliseum" or whattever else they called it was built in the early 60's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dcat said:

please explain how a new venue would solve the problem illustrated below?  We need a new owner way more than a  new venue, although it would be nice.

 

Maybe, but the demand for a new stadium COULD lead to the Jets eventually getting one. No amount of complaining will get Woody to say "oh, Jets fans on a random forum want me out so I guess I will just walk away." It's a pointless conversation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, johnnyjet said:

It’s not easily accessible from anywhere but Jersey. It’s sucks for traveling fans. I’ve been to over half the nfl stadiums.  This one is close to the worst. 

No way.  I grew up in Jersey, live on LI now and lived in the Philly area for some time.  The stadium is right smack on I95.  It’s super easy from all over Jersey and have gotten there and back from the Philly area in under 2 hours each way.  Only a few hours from the Boston area and the Beltway.  All huge population centers with fans of all different NFL teams living in those areas.  
 

LI Queens - nightmare to get to from everywhere else except LI.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Xtina said:

Hahaha taxpayers always foot the bill 

That was then, this is now. When is the last time taxpayers built a stadium especially for a team that isn't relocating. Taxpayers will give them some land and build some infrastructure, but that is it. Lately the owners have been paying and getting a sweetheart deal loan from the NFL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ZachEY said:

You’re in Arizona, right?  Of course it would be awesome for you for all the things you mentioned, and the associated costs and hassle for once a year or every other year you make a game (assuming, obviously) would be no huge deal - and it would look great on TV.

But you wouldn’t regularly deal with $100 parking and the traffic, or the multiple modes public of transportation that would be overloaded and slow.  You wouldn’t regularly deal with the lack of tailgating, with the only option being  $12 beers and $18 burgers anywhere close to the stadium.  You wouldn’t deal with long lines and increased security.  You wouldn’t pay 2.5-3X for tickets, forget the PSLs!  You wouldn’t pay 1.5-2X for concessions.  This isn’t even a comprehensive list.

Jets games would be attended by the wealthy, and tourists, exclusively.  Woody would be skewered for not selling Manhattan real estate at East Rutherford prices.

 

All good points. There's no doubt the composition of the fanbase attending the games would change with a WSS, and that's probably not a good thing.  Losing or severely limiting the tailgating atmosphere wouldn't be great either.  And yes, seeing many of our most diehard fans get priced out would be tough to stomach.  Then again, they'd probably be the ones willing to make the effort to get to the stadium on a Sunday vs. the wealthy or corporate types who get gifted tickets or only pop into a Knicks or Rangers game because they're already in the city on a Wednesday.  JMHO.

I'll differ on the transportation issue though, especially for Sunday mornings/afternoons when most games take place.  Pre-pandemic we'd see upwards of 1.6 million people traveling into Manhattan DAILY during the work week.  On a Sunday I don't think there would be any issue accommodating 60-80,000 people if that's how many were coming from outside Manhattan via multiple modes of transportation (train, bus, car, ferry).  Arrivals would be spread over a period of a couple hours, the bigger issue would be departures all taking place after the game clock ticked 0:00, but I think it would still be manageable.  Again, if you have approx 1.6M people leaving Manahattan between 4PM and 7PM (500K per hour) on weekdays I think the system could handle 70K on a Sunday.

And yes, as an out-of-towner now in AZ my perspective is certainly different.  I'm okay spending more on fewer games with a better and more enjoyable game experience rather than using the same budget to attend more games at a mundane stadium with a mediocre gameday experience in the swamps of NJ.  Perhaps I'm unique in that regard, looking more for quality than quantity.  After all, this is entertainment and discretionary spending.

 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, johnnyjet said:

It’s not easily accessible from anywhere but Jersey. It’s sucks for traveling fans. I’ve been to over half the nfl stadiums.  This one is close to the worst. 

I live in Rockland County NY and the stadium is a nice 40 minute drive.  It is very accessible from everywhere except probably Long Island and that's the problem since a lot of fans live out there.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

Maybe, but the demand for a new stadium COULD lead to the Jets eventually getting one. No amount of complaining will get Woody to say "oh, Jets fans on a random forum want me out so I guess I will just walk away." It's a pointless conversation. 

Agreed.  The Jet fan protest was the impetus behind Adam Gase's firing.

1506911803_JetFanProtest.jpg.6b208c4f59faa71eca49535b58810ca2.jpg

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bostonmajet said:

That was then, this is now. When is the last time taxpayers built a stadium especially for a team that isn't relocating. Taxpayers will give them some land and build some infrastructure, but that is it. Lately the owners have been paying and getting a sweetheart deal loan from the NFL.

That's why there were stories about the "Austin" Bills last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The west side stadium over the rail yards would have launched the Jets into the stratosphere.  Their own stadium for once.  They would own NYC.  Retractable roof, grass field, cool architecture over the railyards so tons of mass transit from everywhere.  The past 20 years would have been like a series of neverending orgasms.  But, Woody really didn't want to spend all that money, his own money, and we weren't gonna agree to anything where the public paid for it.  So...MetLife.


This is so confoundedly untrue. Woody was shelling out $300million dollars of his own just to build the platform over the rail yard and create a state of the art rail hub underneath. Woody is a poor owner when it comes to football knowledge but he’s never been cheap.


Sent from my iPhone using JetNation.com mobile app
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...