This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on May 20, 2009 2:40 PM. The previous post in this blog was Pie Chart of the Week. The next post in this blog is Sunday's on the phone to Monday. Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff

Wednesday, May 20, 2009

Parks Board to Paulson: Take your stadium and shove it

Good for them. [Via WW.]

It will be interesting to watch Fireman Randy try to save face as the colossally misguided Paulson deal dies (as it now seems virtually certain to do).

Comments (17)

Wishful thinking. Adams/Leonard will keep kicking the can until Paulson takes it away from them, and I don't think that's happening yet.

No viable site, not nearly enough available money, rabid public opposition, City Hall in tatters -- a lot of things could happen under these conditions, but a $50 million minor league baseball stadium isn't one of them.

My guess is that MLS will have to play in PGE, and they'll take that rather than walk.

The NYT has an article about Montreal being back in the MLS soccer hunt that starts,

"Montreal is again being considered for a Major League Soccer expansion team, possibly for the 2011 season when teams in Portland, Ore., and Vancouver are also scheduled to enter the league."

I don't see any mention of Montreal replacing Portland. Instead, the problem with Montreal's bid is getting enough seats. You know, like PGE Park already has.

I say let the Timbers go on playing where Pele played the last competitive match of his life. If it was good enough for him, they should make do.

PS I'm not counting his official last game - the exhibition at Giants Stadium because Pele switched sides at half-time.

This sets up a fun Leonard v. Fish dynamic for the foreseeable future.


MLS in this case stands for Major League Sucker, which is what they are trying to play Portland for.

"No viable site, not nearly enough available money, rabid public opposition, City Hall in tatters"

All of this was true a few weeks ago when they at least temporarily gave up on Memorial Coliseum. They'll either keep pushing Lents or pick another site (back to the Coliseum? the PPS facility north of Broadway?) Swish, spit, repeat. I think it's more likely that Paulson moves the team out of Portland then he accepts keeping them at PGE.

Who'd take him? Seattle and San Jose already have MLS. Boise? Spokane? Fresno? Too funny. Poor little guy -- nobody wants his daddy's money.

Can't Montreal just use the Stade Olympique?

Leonard needs to be recalled. It is too bad we can't do him and Creepy in one fell swoop.

What about St. Louis? The proposed team had everything except the deep pocket Don Garber wanted. Maybe the city will tear down that old arch for the Paulsons.

I see the Beavers moving, not the soccer team. To Vancouver or Hillsboro, some place that is politically and financially cheaper.

My dream scenario is both teams share PGE Park. I know it can work - because it already does.

And if that means we don't get a few international match-up exhibitions then so be it. I bet that's negotiable too. If Civic Stadium was good enough for Franz Beckenbauer, then an international team shouldn't feel too embarrassed playing there.

It's one thing not to be very popular as a sport in a country. But when you start demanding PGE Park as a baseball-free venue, during the biggest recession of our lifetimes, that becomes obnoxious.

I'd feel the same way if we went to Europe and demanded they throw out the local soccer team and only play our game in their Civic Stadium.

Soccer's not going to win over America because some rich kid has a sense of entitlement. It has to earn its way into our hearts.

Now back to the Orlando-Cleveland game...See? We already have great sports.

I commend the Parks Board for a concise analysis of how the proposed Triple A ballpark would affect Lents, even with the minimal information that is available. It is a polite letter that correctly reflects the basis of Portland's park system. I think Fish's imprint is being made in the Parks Bureau and reflected in this letter.

Hear, hear.

I agree totally, Jerry.

The Parks Board went to the nitty gritty, as far as I am concerned, as a citizen.

Also, since the planners seem intent upon increasing density, then there not only should be no loss of park space, there should be a requirement upon all major development to create new public park space.

You can read Randy's response to the Parks Board letter at Willie Week. Also a report on Randy's appearance at a meeting with Lents neighbors last night. Talk about too funny.


Clicky Web Analytics