Donald Sensing, citing a Cato Institute study, adds yet more evidence that government subsidies for sports stadia are economic boondoggles. He cites the case of Nashville.
But here’s, as Ross Perot would say, the beauty part: Houston wouldn’t provide Bud Adams a new stadium, so he up and moved to Nashville, which would. Since then, Houston has built a new stadium to attract an expansion franchise, the Texans. Likewise, Art Modell is considered to be just a shade better than Adolf Hitler for moving the former Browns to Baltimore as the Ravens because Cleveland wouldn’t buy him a new stadium. They promptly turned around and bought a new stadium for the Browns version 2.0. And Baltimore? They lost the Colts to Indianapolis–which may ba about to lose them again–only to spend money to lure someone else’s team a few years later. Ditto, St. Louis, which once had the Cardinals (now Arizona formerly Phoenix formerly St. Louis formerly Chicago), who paid to lure the Rams from L.A.
Do all these cities really think it’s economically smart to do this? I can’t imagine so. But, apparently, there is some mystic value to having an NFL team that clouds the judgment. Ironically, one exception may be L.A. which lost both the Rams and Raiders in one offseason and appears not to be looking back. The NFL is desperate to move a struggling franchise there, but L.A. isn’t going to pony up the money for it.
Cross-post to SportsBlog




