http://www.dailyrecord.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060331/UPDATES01/603310356/1002/SPORTS NJ, NFL announce revised stadium deal BY JANET FRANKSTON ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER NEWARK (AP) -- Officials from the state, the New York Giants and the New York Jets announced today they've made several changes to an agreement signed last fall that will create a new, $1 billion football stadium in the Meadowlands. Meanwhile today, the Jets announced the team has selected Florham Park as the new location for its corporate headquarters and practice facility. The team is expected to move from Hempstead, N.Y., in the summer of 2007. Under the updated stadium agreement, the state would not be required to pay for $30 million of infrastructure costs around the stadium, said Gary Rose, chief of the governor's office of economic growth. The stadium is expected to open for the 2010 season and will seat about 81,000. The new stadium agreement comes after Gov. Jon S. Corzine earlier this month questioned the financial terms of the original deal, brokered by his predecessor, former Gov. Richard J. Codey. The teams would also be allowed to collect money for naming rights to the stadium and the complex as a whole, with the exception of the Continental Airlines Arena and a new entertainment and retail development that is being built there. The state also would drop its pursuit of a retractable dome for the new arena, Rose said. Team owners had said they would kill the earlier agreement if the state forced them to pay for a roof. "Governor Codey made a tremendous effort to keep the Giants and Jets in New Jersey and today's announcement confirms the partnership that has been fostered between New Jersey and the teams," Corzine said in a statement. "The stadium that will be built will be a world-class facility that will set a new standard for football venues." The owners of the teams said in a joint statement that they are pleased with the updated agreement. "We are very grateful to the governor for recognizing the importance of this project," said Woody Johnson, chairman and chief executive officer of the Jets. "We are looking forward to moving ahead and beginning work on the new stadium as planned." Andrew Zimbalist, a professor of economics at Smith College who specializes in sports, called the updated agreement a nice compromise. "Corzine is to be congratulated for getting another bite at the apple," he said. In a memorandum of understanding signed in September, the Giants and Jets agreed to jointly finance the new stadium at the Meadowlands Sports Complex in East Rutherford. Another sticking point had been property taxes for East Rutherford. East Rutherford officials said it was unfair that the original agreement didn't account for the collection of property taxes on the ancillary development the teams are proposing to build: about 520,000 square feet for restaurants, entertainment and retail space around the stadium. East Rutherford Mayor James Cassella had threatened to take legal action over the property tax issue. Cassella said the borough has had discussions with state officials in the last few days, but no dollar amount has been agreed to. Rose said the discussions with East Rutherford are ongoing and the state wants to find a solution. While the Giants will build their own training facility on a site within the Meadowlands in East Rutherford, the Jets will move to Florham Park, a borough of 12,000 about 30 miles west of Manhattan. The Jets also considered sites in Jersey City, Wood-Ridge, Berkeley Heights and Millburn. "After conducting a comprehensive search, we have concluded that the Florham Park site best fits our needs as an organization," Jets President Jay Cross said in a statement. Florham Park Mayor Frank Tinari said the Jets' offices would be part of a 420-acre development, with housing, offices, a hotel and day care center. The development must still receive zoning approval from the borough, which should take place over the next two months, he said. Not sure if this was posted
OK, this is the stupidest thing I've heard in a long time! So, a brand new stadium in New Jersey and no freakin' roof! So, no Super Bowl ever, never in the NY Metro Area. You anti WSS Stadium people are to blame for the Jets staying in NJ long term, leaving Hofstra for NJ, and NY NEVER EVER getting a Super Bowl or other indoor events!
I'm glad there's no roof. Football is to be played outdoors. If there is bad weather, and your stadium has a retractable roof, you have to close it. That's why this is a good deal. Football should NEVER be played indoors, unless it's the Super Bowl.
hey Pennington, did you read your own post? You said if there is a RETRACTABLE roof, you get the best of both worlds. I love football outside, but not in the rain or snow or minus wind chill days. Plus, no Super Bowl, no other events... ...it's totally stupid!
I also read this in the Star-Ledger this morning. The article pointed out both teams did not want the roof (probably because they would have to pay for it and wouldn't be able to generate that much more in revenue). We're building a stadium now estimated to cost $1 Billion and it won't have a slider? WTF?
Woody was more than willing to anti up for the WSS! Now we can't get he and the Giants to anti up for a Roof? BRILLIANT!
Ironically , the media took this angle to make the JETS look bad when the reality was it was the GIANTS who didn't want to split it or pay at all! Typical Media BS
I thought I read somewhere that the NFL helps pay for a retractable roof on new stadiums in cold-weather areas so they could have a Suberbowl there. It's supposed to be something like a $200,000/team allowance toward the roof. So then the argument was presented to Tagliabue that since both the Giants and the Jets were going in on this thing, the question became, do they both each get the $200,000, for a total of $400,000? I think I remember reading where a slider costs $600,000 or so, so that would put the money pretty close to making it happen. Of course, if I read correctly in this morning's paper, it sounded like both teams DO NOT WANT a retractable roof. Why TF would we not want to have the option of closing it up, especially if you can get the NFL to pay for 66% of the thing? Seems pretty stupid to me.
Have you ever been to a domed stadium game in December or January? I went to the Rams Jets game in St. Louis in January 2005, there's nothing like an indoor stadium in bad or cold weather.
I think you nailed it, Tee. It's been the Giants all along who've boo-hooed the retractable roof, "manly men" that they are. God forbid when I'm 75 years old I should be able to sit in f*cking comfort and watch a game without freezing my nuts off.
It's part of the experience. Football is about freezing your ass off. I love the cold, except like '84 playoff vs N.E. cold, that was atrocious.
I know what I said, football should be played outdoors all year round, that includes in the rain, snow, and windy conditions. If the fans can't take it, then they don't have to go to the games. When I said that "if your stadium has a retractable roof, you have to close it.", that wasn't my opinion, that is (or was, I'm not sure if it's still in effect) a league rule.
I've been to Giants Stadium in December and January, when it is cold and snowing, and it is a great football experience. It's the way the sport should be played. Not 70 degrees, indoors.
What? Rain, snow, minus degree weather, that IS football in the Northeast. How could you not love that?? I'm glad there's no roof. No super bowl? While it would be quite the spectacle to have one here in New Jersey, it's not something that'll keep me up at night. No indoor sports at our football stadium? Again, don't care, it's a football stadium. And the reason Woody would have paid for it with the WSS but not now, is that if he didn't for the WSS, it wouldn't have had even the slightest chance of getting done, he knew he didn't need to with the Jersey stadium, because there was NO chance they'd ever let it fall through (unlike the New Yorkers).
Look, I'm as macho as the next guy. Sit in the snow and watch a game for 3 hours? How about you go out on bivouac in Officer's Candidate School where you SLEEP in the snow for two weeks, huh? And you run 102-degree fever and no sick call because that would wash you out of OCS, so you take it? Then you go to jungle training in Panama and march around with the snakes and fire ants for 3 weeks, then they send you to Vietnam and you live in 105-degrees while humping around the bush, going out on night ambushes and daytime operations for the entire year? I've skied Sugarbush all day with a windchill at -15, 4 O'Clock in the afternoon and the sun's goin' down and you're still headed up to the black diamond expert trail for one last run... the tip of your nose feels like it's gonna fall the f*ck off. You guys like extreme temperatures? No f*cking problem. But I'm 61 years old now, dudes! Gimme a little f*cking comfort now, okay? I WANT THE ROOF!
There a problem with this theory when applying it to the real world. Three years ago the Jets played Pittsburgh in a blizzard. Now, I went and it was one of the best times I ever had at a Jets game, the problem is about 40,000 people didn't. It was about an even split between Jets and Steeler fans. So in the fairy tale world where we're all lumberjacks with frozen moustaches laughing off the sub zero temps in short sleeves, everything is A-OK. In the real world, everybody but the crazies stay home. This was so short sighted it's ridiculous.
Wear layers. If you still can't handle it, give up your season tickets. I'd be glad to take them off your hands.
