Skip to content

A potential setback for D.C. United’s ongoing stadium pursuits

Feb 22, 2014, 6:28 PM EST

RFK Stadium 2

We warned you earlier this week about how stadium renderings are a long, long, long way from fans actually fans in the house, waving big foam fingers inside an actual structure.

The Washington Post has an interesting story about a D.C. council member and mayoral candidate who doesn’t sound very interested in the ongoing administration’s efforts to facilitate D.C. United’s soccer stadium in the area known as Buzzard Point.

Muriel Bowser will not support proposals by Mayor Vincent C. Gray’s favorable to building that soccer ground at Buzzard Point, the one that would get United out of the RFK Stadium financial sinkhole. So, if she is elected …

And if you aren’t bummed out enough already, try this one: When asked about any possible alternative plans for assisting in D.C. United’s stadium efforts, here’s what Bowser said according to The Post: “I don’t know that that’s my first priority. My priority would be making sure that we are meeting a whole lot of capital needs that the city has, including how we’re going to transform middle schools across the city.”

Hard to argue that schools and such should be priority for the district. Still, that’s certainly not going to make soccer fans in the area any more optimistic about getting the heck out of decrepit RFK Stadium.

  1. nextmanup81 - Feb 22, 2014 at 7:06 PM

    As much as I like soccer, it’s good to see that a civic leader prioritizes schools over sports. Find another way to build the stadium without relying on politicians. Certainly it’s tough, but there must be ways to get it done.

    • wandmdave - Feb 24, 2014 at 2:57 PM

      While I agree with your statement even putting a small business (say a bank branch) requires city council approvals and funding. Traffic patterns need to be analysed and updated etc. Zoning may need to be done. Make it a massive stadium and you have to add parking studies and such. You can’t completely separate things from government they at least need to rubber stamp it and work out a deal to provide the necessary infrastructure to support the endeavor even if a private citizen or enterprise is funding the entire thing. If our governments were so single minded that working on one thing precludes working on anything else then absolutely nothing would get done so she’s really presenting a false choice.

  2. hildezero - Feb 22, 2014 at 7:11 PM

    Let me guess… She’s a Republican, right?

    • Matthew - Feb 22, 2014 at 8:45 PM

      You’re kidding, right? She’s a potential Democratic candidate for D.C. Mayor, Hildezero, who – unlike the current mayoralty – seems to have their priorities in line as to what constitutes a civic need and what doesn’t.

      Let’s see…what’s more important for a city: schools vs. soccer stadium? On this one, the schools win.

      • hildezero - Feb 22, 2014 at 9:09 PM

        Nah. I’m not kidding, Matthew. On this one, schools don’t win. Schools always wins, but not on this situation.

    • booger1234 - Feb 23, 2014 at 10:25 AM

      Republican? You must be drinking that Kool-Aid buddy! Libtard much?

      • hildezero - Feb 23, 2014 at 10:51 AM

        Kool-Aid? You must be chewing too much tobacco, knucklehead! Ha! Republican… XD Brainwashed much?

  3. oquintero99 - Feb 22, 2014 at 10:53 PM

    Good for her! I hope the stadium doesnt get financed with public funds

  4. jrocknstuff - Feb 22, 2014 at 11:41 PM

    What you don’t see here is Bowser is 100% anti-sports. It isn’t all about supporting schools. She was the reason it took so long to get the Expos to DC. She alone struck down plans for DC baseball multiple times. This woman is a ball-buster when it comes to any and all sports.

    • smgraff4 - Feb 23, 2014 at 12:39 AM

      She’s had to retrace her steps since yesterday. The comments were something of “We need to know real value of Reeves before trade. United is important to DC. Residents expect leaders to protect assets.” This isn’t an unequivocal “No” to the land swap. It isn’t a “Yes” either. It sounds as if she wants to look for information on Reeves Center. The answer is…wait and see, and let’s see what happens with both the Democratic primary and the mayor’s race.

      I’m still optimistic about the stadium being done despite all the hurdles in front of it/

  5. godsholytrousers - Feb 23, 2014 at 8:00 AM

    The problem DC faces is that nothing gets done in that city without political consent.
    It is not just a question of private funding, and it never will be.

  6. booger1234 - Feb 23, 2014 at 10:26 AM

    United needs to get out of DC like the Redskins did. DC is a corrupt pile of crap especially with Obummer and other Libtards running the show in DC.

  7. rphillish - Feb 23, 2014 at 12:22 PM

    Man, you can’t mention Washington DC without political trolls crawling out from their caves.

    The problem goes beyond just a mayoral candidate. The people don’t want to spend their tax dollars on a soccer field. I hate to say this, but maybe it’s time for DC United’s owners to play hardball with the city and threaten to leave. You see it in the NHL all the time, and there’s plenty of places that would love to give DC United a pretty new stadium.

  8. soccerphanatic - Feb 23, 2014 at 4:46 PM

    To be fair, United really should move outside of the city limits. Whether it be across the Potomac to Alexandria or Fairfax, or as far north as Baltimore, they need to move. Even FedEx Field would be a better option than staying in RFK for another decade.

  9. chadmoon1 - Feb 24, 2014 at 4:04 PM

    Why hasn’t the option of building a new, smaller stadium at the same location as RFK been looked into? Having never been there, is the location of the stadium good and easy to get to?Maybe they could build the new stadium in the parking lot, or have it demolished and find a temp home for 2 years while new place being built?

Leave Comment

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

Featured video

Man United thrash Liverpool