Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2011 8:25 pm
^AMAZING VIDEO. Actually gave me the chills to think about the culture that's been built around the Vikings. That better be on TV...
Vikings Message Board.Com
A message board dedicated to the discussion of Minnesota Viking Football.
https://beta1.vikingsmessageboard.com/
Stadium thread
Page 79 of 147
Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2011 9:10 pm
They should be playing that on MN tv stations all over.
Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2011 9:41 pm
I'm not gonna lie, I cried a bit when I watched it.thatguy wrote:^AMAZING VIDEO. Actually gave me the chills to think about the culture that's been built around the Vikings. That better be on TV...
Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2011 10:25 pm
Great video, thanks for posting it. I know I'm getting old now because I remember watching all those highlights when they happened. 
Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2011 10:30 pm
Great video. I hope they lead off with this video for all the discussions.
Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 1:42 am
The video is more than just a little bit implying that the Vikings will leave Minnesota if they don't get a new stadium.HELP PRESERVE THE TRADITION.
Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 8:40 am
The Vikings really ought to buy time locally for MNF this week. Would be definite cooler talk Tuesday morning.Eli wrote: The video is more than just a little bit implying that the Vikings will leave Minnesota if they don't get a new stadium.
Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 4:20 pm
http://www.startribune.com/local/minnea ... 52703.html
Great, more ammo for Zellers. If indeed it means that they need to play next season in the Dome, maybe it would be a good thing because they could iron out a lot of things. But I still would like them to figure out something sooner.Vikings’ lease may require them to play next season in the Metrodome
Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 4:43 pm
But the lease does not prevent them from dealing with other cities for what happens after the lease. It would be a mistake for the Politicians to use this to delay a new stadium. You can only push people around so far before they push back. And so far the Vikings have not pushed back.PurpleMustReign wrote:http://www.startribune.com/local/minnea ... 52703.html
Great, more ammo for Zellers. If indeed it means that they need to play next season in the Dome, maybe it would be a good thing because they could iron out a lot of things. But I still would like them to figure out something sooner.
Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 9:35 pm
So that means that the Vikings must stay in Minnesota one more year. Big deal. I pretty much expected them to sign a one year lease anyway. I don't think Zygi is ready to move the team after this season. He's probably not far from it, but not yet.
Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2011 10:07 pm
I find it a little hard to believe that LA would want another try at an NFL team. They have failed before. Unless theres fast money in it. But the market just isnt there. You would think the NFL would do everything possible to keep the Vikes in MN, where they belong.
Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2011 3:48 pm
According to this Article the Vikings may be contractually obligated to play at the Metrodome for the 2012 season. The Vikings disagree with the interpretation of the clause. More at the link...
Also another article from the Twincities.comThe clause states in part that: "For each football season, or part of football season, while this Agreement is suspended, the term of this Agreement ... shall be extended by one football season."
By legal definition, "force majeure" means an unavoidable circumstance or accident.
On Dec. 12, 2010, a blizzard collapsed the Metrodome's roof, forcing the NFL to move that day's Vikings-Giants game to Detroit's Ford Field. The Vikings played their final home game on Dec. 20 at TCF Bank Stadium against the Chicago Bears.
Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2011 7:16 pm
Essentially, an 'act of God'.By legal definition, "force majeure" means an unavoidable circumstance or accident.
But I wonder if it could be interpreted in an even broader sense. Did the Vikings miss any other games in the dome during the past 30 years? What about during the strike shortened season of 1982? What about during the World Series of 1987 and 1991?
Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2011 6:37 am
It's an interesting question, but I'm not sure any other instance would apply. The strike season certainly wasn't "unavoidable" (at least that would be my argument if I were the Vikings). And as far as the World Series Games (IIRC) didn't that just re-arrange the schedule for home/away games. IOW they didn't play less than 8 home games that season did they? (I don't remember)Eli wrote: Essentially, an 'act of God'.
But I wonder if it could be interpreted in an even broader sense. Did the Vikings miss any other games in the dome during the past 30 years? What about during the strike shortened season of 1982? What about during the World Series of 1987 and 1991?
Re: Stadium thread
Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2011 12:58 pm
I would tend to agree, a strike wouldn't be force majeure.Just Me wrote: It's an interesting question, but I'm not sure any other instance would apply. The strike season certainly wasn't "unavoidable" (at least that would be my argument if I were the Vikings).
I checked the '87 season as well, since a game was lost between the start of the strike and the replacement players playing, but it appears the Vikes lost a road game (had 8 home, 7 road that year)
There was only one conflict, in '87 with Game 7 of the WS. Vikes were bumped to Monday night. This has occurred with other teams as well (Marlins/Dolphins at least once, WS bumped Dolphins to Monday night).Just Me wrote:And as far as the World Series Games (IIRC) didn't that just re-arrange the schedule for home/away games. IOW they didn't play less than 8 home games that season did they? (I don't remember)