Irsay remains key to Super Bowl bid

February 19, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
While Mayor Greg Ballard and his team plan to announce today their intent to bid for the 2012 Super Bowl, sources within the league said Indianapolis Colts’ owner Jim Irsay will be the determining factor.

“They could be the Emerald City, and it still comes down to one thing,” said an executive for a West Coast team. “Whether the other NFL owners want to do this for Jim Irsay. It’s not unanimous, but a number of owners think he deserves this.”

But it’s more than a popularity contest.

“This can get pretty complicated,” said the West Coast executive. “There’s a lot of ‘I’ll scratch your back you scratch mine,’ mentality here on a number of levels. Back-room deals and under-the-table handshakes? You bet.”

Marc Ganis, president of Sportscorp. Ltd., a Chicago-firm that advises a number of NFL teams on business operations, thinks Irsay’s clout among the other 31 team owners is rising.

“The weather in Indianapolis will always be a problem, but I think it will come to a point where the NFL owners will say, “Hey, there’s a reason we’re doing this,’” Ganis said. “And that reason is to pay back Jim Irsay for what he’s done for the league.”

Houston and Glendale, Ariz. are also expected to bid for the 2012 Super Bowl.

Do you think Irsay has the clout to bring the big game home?
ADVERTISEMENT
  • I think he does. Over the years he has grown in stature among owners by always working in the league's best interests, even in situations where the result might not be in the Colts' best interest.

    I think it's time the other owners reward him for that.

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. I am not by any means judging whether this is a good or bad project. It's pretty simple, the developers are not showing a hardship or need for this economic incentive. It is a vacant field, the easiest for development, and the developer already has the money to invest $26 million for construction. If they can afford that, they can afford to pay property taxes just like the rest of the residents do. As well, an average of $15/hour is an absolute joke in terms of economic development. Get in high paying jobs and maybe there's a different story. But that's the problem with this ask, it is speculative and users are just not known.

  2. Shouldn't this be a museum

  3. I don't have a problem with higher taxes, since it is obvious that our city is not adequately funded. And Ballard doesn't want to admit it, but he has increased taxes indirectly by 1) selling assets and spending the money, 2) letting now private entities increase user fees which were previously capped, 3) by spending reserves, and 4) by heavy dependence on TIFs. At the end, these are all indirect tax increases since someone will eventually have to pay for them. It's mathematics. You put property tax caps ("tax cut"), but you don't cut expenditures (justifiably so), so you increase taxes indirectly.

  4. Marijuana is the safest natural drug grown. Addiction is never physical. Marijuana health benefits are far more reaching then synthesized drugs. Abbott, Lilly, and the thousands of others create poisons and label them as medication. There is no current manufactured drug on the market that does not pose immediate and long term threat to the human anatomy. Certainly the potency of marijuana has increased by hybrids and growing techniques. However, Alcohol has been proven to destroy more families, relationships, cause more deaths and injuries in addition to the damage done to the body. Many confrontations such as domestic violence and other crimes can be attributed to alcohol. The criminal activities and injustices that surround marijuana exists because it is illegal in much of the world. If legalized throughout the world you would see a dramatic decrease in such activities and a savings to many countries for legal prosecutions, incarceration etc in regards to marijuana. It indeed can create wealth for the government by collecting taxes, creating jobs, etc.... I personally do not partake. I do hope it is legalized throughout the world.

  5. Build the resevoir. If built this will provide jobs and a reason to visit Anderson. The city needs to do something to differentiate itself from other cities in the area. Kudos to people with vision that are backing this project.

ADVERTISEMENT