Vikings Message Board.Com

cthusky wrote:Face the facts: you have poured money into a baseball team that will never, never, NEVER make it to the World Series (unless the Yankees and Red Sox fold).

vikeinmontana wrote:

I wonder what his favorite team is?

bring it !!!

OJVIKE wrote:

HOLY ####!!!

Outgoing Minnesota governor says new stadium "highly likely"

Tim Pawlenty, the two-term Minnesota governor who opted not to run for a third time, believes that the next governor of the state will be able to shepherd through the political process a new stadium for the Minnesota Vikings.

"I think it's highly likely, highly likely to get done because it has to," Pawlenty said Wednesday at a Chamber of Commerce event.

He didn't provide a time frame, but it needs to happen fairly soon. The Vikings have only one season left on their Metrodome lease. After that, they can go the way of the Lakers, possibly via a sale to an ownership group including a former Laker.

The Minnesota Legislature convenes after the 2010 season ends. Earlier this year, some progress -- but ultimately not enough -- was made on a stadium that would be only partially funded with public money.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... ly-likely/

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... ngs-to-la/



Add this to BC, Moss, and the entire circus the 2010 Vikings have become, and bye bye Vikings seems more likely than not.

purple guy wrote:http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... ngs-to-la/



Add this to BC, Moss, and the entire circus the 2010 Vikings have become, and bye bye Vikings seems more likely than not.

Didn't both Dayton and Emmer say that a stadium was a priority?

glg wrote: Didn't both Dayton and Emmer say that a stadium was a priority?

All 3 candidates stated that they needed to get something done for them. Emmer's response was hesitant, however.

purple guy wrote:http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... ngs-to-la/



Add this to BC, Moss, and the entire circus the 2010 Vikings have become, and bye bye Vikings seems more likely than not.

You don't base a team leaving on 1 year of problems. You can have a perfectly healthy franchise that'll just up and move. that's the problem with the NFL.

thatguy wrote: You don't base a team leaving on 1 year of problems. You can have a perfectly healthy franchise that'll just up and move. that's the problem with the NFL.

One year of problems???? You must not follow the Vikings, you are saying, this season, is the first one with problems for the Vikings??? OK. Again, I can see why you like BB, 1 good season mixed in with a bunch of crap=a good WR. And, IMO, this season, more than any other, given the economic state of Minnesota, does matter more than the rest when trying to get the public to agree to spend money. They going to base state spending on a new stadium based on the fact we made the NFCC game in 1998 and last season??? Like it or not, this season is important, and its quickly going to ####.

thatguy wrote: You don't base a team leaving on 1 year of problems. You can have a perfectly healthy franchise that'll just up and move. that's the problem with the NFL.

Perfectly healthy? They make the second lowest of any NFL franchise. And for at least one season since Zygi took over were operating in the red and he had to go ask his partners for more money just to keep the team going...

edited.

Demi wrote: Perfectly healthy? They make the second lowest of any NFL franchise. And for at least one season since Zygi took over were operating in the red and he had to go ask his partners for more money just to keep the team going...

You know why that is? BECAUSE we don't have a new stadium... No new stadium = same low revenue flow...new stadium (aka luxury boxes which are the big money makers) = new revenue stream. The Vikings should very much be considered "healthy" other than the stadium issue.

Don't blame the Vikings. Blame the state of Minnesota for "operating losses." Wilf has put tons of his own money into paying for contracts and even upgrading the stadium...and how does the state repay them? Snubbed.

purple guy wrote:
One year of problems???? You must not follow the Vikings, you are saying, this season, is the first one with problems for the Vikings??? OK. Again, I can see why you like BB, 1 good season mixed in with a bunch of crap=a good WR. And, IMO, this season, more than any other, given the economic state of Minnesota, does matter more than the rest when trying to get the public to agree to spend money. They going to base state spending on a new stadium based on the fact we made the NFCC game in 1998 and last season??? Like it or not, this season is important, and its quickly going to ####.

I agree completely. Winning IS important for this cause. However, I don't think that it should be based off this season alone. Wilf is constantly involved with the stadium discussion, and I think there should be something to the fact that Wilf has put in a lot of his own money into paying to get better players and upgrading the team as well as the stadium. It's obvious that Wilf wants the team to be here and that he cares about the team winning. Maybe this season isn't going great, sure. This team has improved essentially every year that Wilf has been the owner. If people are looking at THIS year, yes I'm sure it'll look bad...but if they use their long-term assessment (as they should), they'll see an owner who wants this team to be here...but more importantly WIN!

24/7/365
^That's the amount of time that I'm following the Vikings btw.