Skip to content

Vikings will need to use TCF Bank Stadium for up to two years

126756947-15122010224029 Reuters

Before the Minnesota Legislature signed off on a new stadium with the Vikings, some reports indicated that the team would need to play games at TCF Bank Stadium for only part of one season.  Once the deal was done and the Vikings and the University of Minnesota announced their agreement, the possibility of the Vikings using the stadium for “up to four consecutive seasons” was broached for the first time.

On Friday, team owners Zygi and Mark Wilf said in a wide-ranging interview with reporters that TCF Bank Stadium would be used for one full year, “but it very well may be two.”

Setting aside the question of why a more specific estimate can’t be provided, it’s hard not to wonder whether the Vikings subtly obscured the extent to which TCF Bank Stadium would be used.  If phrases like “up to four consecutive seasons” had been used during the process of rallying support for the new venue, plenty of legislators and fans may have said something like, “Well, if you can play there for up to four consecutive seasons, why can’t you play there indefinitely?”

It would have been a fair question, but it never was asked because there was never a reason to do so.

Regardless of whether TCF Bank Stadium is used for one game or a full decade, the biggest question fans are asking is whether beer will be sold there.  That issue has not yet been decided.

Permalink 21 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Minnesota Vikings, Rumor Mill, Top Stories
21 Responses to “Vikings will need to use TCF Bank Stadium for up to two years”
  1. deeppurple23 says: May 12, 2012 8:30 AM

    It not a fair question to ask why not “indefinitely”. TCF is not an NFL stadium, it’s too small, the NFL will lose millions every game and the facilities, i.e. bathroom and concessions are not up to speed for an NFL facility. This has been discussed for quite some time, I would have thought that joke of a Monday nighter two years ago against the Bears would have proved that point. MF you know all this, and you should know better than to add “it’s a fair question”. It’s an accommodation to the city of Minneapolis and the people of MN. Remember the Vikings’ plan was Arden Hills not next to the Metrodump.

  2. cusoman says: May 12, 2012 10:00 AM

    The question of beer has been decided. A bill was passed this same session that allows for the sale of liquor there. Do your homework!

  3. dmartin17 says: May 12, 2012 10:02 AM

    It’s almost as if this stadium deal is a HUGE SCAM for the people of MN.

    Bending over backwards to help out a team that makes millions of dollars annually.

  4. realitypolice says: May 12, 2012 10:30 AM

    I love when people with no background in the industry and no idea whatsoever of how construction projects work can get their feathers all ruffled when people refuse to be “more specific” in their estimates of how long it will take to complete a project.

    There a thousand reasons a construction project can be delayed, through no one’s fault. It would be PR suicide to commit to an opening date when you haven’t even broken ground yet.

    And if someone had asked “if you can play there for four years, why can’t you play there indefinitely?”, they would have been laughed out of the room because they would have been the only person too stupid to realize that:

    A) No NFL team would ever settle for sharing a stadium with a College team in the College team’s stadium, for reasons too numerous to list here and,

    B) No one thinks the Vikings will be there that long, and that number was only thrown out there for CYA purposes.

  5. bobdbob says: May 12, 2012 10:30 AM

    dmartin17 – you have no idea what you are talking about. This is a great deal for MN and everyone in it. First of all, we get to keep the team, second, jobs will be created, third, we will be able to host other sporting events, like the super bowl, final four, etc… With all of that comes extra income for the state. This is a win all of the way around. Until you have read and seen the details of this, you probably shouldn’t comment, it just makes you look stupid!

  6. ampats says: May 12, 2012 10:37 AM

    Build an outdoor stadium. Home field advantage bringing back the days of the Purple People Eaters.

  7. thankheavenfornumberseven says: May 12, 2012 10:49 AM

    The Vikings haven’t even chosen an architect yet, so there’s no way to know what they’re going to be able to do with respect to building the new stadium while playing in the Metrodome. The builders will decide how much work they can do before the long-awaited demolition of the dome. That’s why a more specific answer can’t be provided.

  8. Mike Florio says: May 12, 2012 10:52 AM

    Read the release from the University of Minnesota. It hasn’t been decided yet.

  9. greatminnesotasportsmind says: May 12, 2012 10:55 AM

    I would hate to see an outdoor stadium. First we just built one that opened 2 years ago. Second if it’s out doors, we are not getting any Final Four’s let alone any regionals. No way would the NFL give Minnesota another Super Bowl if it wasn’t domed. I like the idea of a retractable roof espically in September and early October games.

  10. skolvikesskol says: May 12, 2012 11:00 AM

    1- the state approved liquor sales. So it doesnt matter what the uom postion on liquor sales is… We actually own the stadium outright.

    2. The unknown project timeline is a lie… The builders of the dome were given a deadline to be ready. They said they beat the deadline for a cash bonus. They did.

    The reason deadlines aren’t imposed now is that it makes it harder for all parties to missapropriate funds as well as they would actually have to work hard,

  11. 7ransponder says: May 12, 2012 11:12 AM

    Mike Florio says:
    May 12, 2012 10:52 AM
    Read the release from the University of Minnesota. It hasn’t been decided yet.

    ———————-

    I see now, however the groundwork really is there already, it’s just a matter of formalizing it. Hard liquor will likely be nixed, it’s all about the beer.

  12. fmlizard says: May 12, 2012 11:21 AM

    Hope the Vikes aren’t at TCF for too long. The TCF project was sold as “back to campus” but in reality, the Dome was already just blocks from the campus.

    The real reason the Gophers needed TCF was to get a college atmosphere and a place where they had more than just a key to the locker room. If the Vikings stay too long and start to impose themselves on the place it only hurts the Gophers. And that is the last thing their struggling program needs right now.

  13. Justin says: May 12, 2012 11:29 AM

    “the biggest question fans are asking is whether beer will be sold there. That issue has not yet been decided.”

    YES IT HAS! A little fact checking shows that they passed a bill that allows selling of alcohol starting this season for the Gophers. And if you have watched the Gophers you definitely are going to need it.

  14. fritz1218 says: May 12, 2012 11:56 AM

    Seems like every opinion writer knows the truth and it’s always different.

  15. kevpft says: May 12, 2012 1:54 PM

    Wow – a new stadium, likely Super Bowl in a few years, and two years or more of outdoors Vikings games in an old-school atmosphere? That sounds like a major win for area fans.

    Going back to a cushy dome afterward will be a letdown, but business is business I suppose.

  16. cleonslamminsalmon says: May 12, 2012 2:17 PM

    The local TV station will still have to eat a bunch of tickets to prevent black outs.

  17. truthserum4u says: May 12, 2012 2:35 PM

    There are a few practical reasons why staying at TCF Bank indefinitely would never have been considered.

    1) The stadium capacity is too small (50,805 – 39 suites)

    2) The field is not heated (restricting home scheduling)

    3) The U of M doesn’t want a long term partner to share in the stadium. (one reason they sought to have their own stadium built)

    You have to curb your cynical nature on occassion there Mike.

  18. minnysoda says: May 12, 2012 7:06 PM

    Now I see why the Vikings got rid of Longwell he can’t kick outdoors. His last season in Green Bay opposing kickers had a better FG pct than him.

    Let’s see this team was built for playing indoors and they were terrible what are they going to do OUTSIDE.

    They will be so bad that the stadium may not get finished. They will stop construction due to lack of interest

  19. zn0rseman says: May 12, 2012 9:37 PM

    Union versus non-union labor.

    Union labor takes up to 4 years to build a stadium.

    Non-union labor gets it done in 6 months.

  20. dbreinki says: May 13, 2012 12:00 AM

    Hey zn0rseman.
    A bit anti-union?
    We get the point.
    But, the bill wouldn’t pass without their support. #loser

  21. zn0rseman says: May 13, 2012 11:17 AM

    dbreinki says:
    Hey zn0rseman.
    A bit anti-union?
    We get the point.
    But, the bill wouldn’t pass without their support. #loser
    —————–

    The fact that the only way such a stadium could be built is with expensive and extremely slow and lazy union labor is a fundamental problem with this nation. The fact that unions, via Democrat political puppets, hold such bills hostage unless it is agreed that only union labor is used, is nothing short of legalized extortion. Much like Affirmative Action is nothing more than legalized racism.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!