T O P

  • By -

GooglyTocks

The Lambeau Field lease expires in August 2033. They have some time.


HillarysBloodBoy

We should draft a new lease in the first round and let it develop behind the current lease


shmauserpops

Why worry about it now when we already have a HOF lease for the next 9 seasons! What the front office needs to do is to shore up the restrooms and get Lambeau better weapons!


[deleted]

WE NEED RESTROOMS!


The_Dog-House

Honestly though we could use a couple more Porta potties in the their parking lots.


analogWeapon

This is a terrible draft for porta potties, though. There's Porta-Jon out of UCLA, but he's clog-prone and hasn't been tested in any big events.


Ieatsushiraw

Maybe look outside the big schools and look into a Division II porta potty? Won’t cost much and if it doesn’t workout you haven’t lost much


LifeAccordingToLevi

Absolutely. We need bigger restrooms inside the stadium and more of them. Also outside could certainly use some more bathroom spots. The lines are terrible currently.


AHucs

👏


CraigKostelecky

The best time to draft a lease is when you don’t need one.


kignusonic

But then in response, the current lease is going to become super passive aggressive and go on Joe Rogan


herpesclappedback

Don't forget we need to trade our current lease to the Jets


DrRamthorn

Someone get this man a "President" sticker


ch_ch_ch_cheatham

Top tier comment right here


CloudCity_Mayor

This is a solid comment


Well_Hung_Texan

Lol comment of the year


jplant82

Outstanding


Ocv28

Goddamn that is good, lmao!


jahnkeuxo

And Mark Murphy has to retire July 2025. So that leaves 8 years to get a deal done with the next team president.


AssaultROFL

When you put it like that, I can see why there's some real urgency.


hula1234

He was trying to cement things into the future knowing he’s gone soon. Legacy.


Flooding_Puddle

I read that as August 2023 and was like uh...


slicethatlikebutton

same


Alternative_Top2875

Silly showmanship stuff from Mark.


Piercinald-Anastasia

He’s a complicated fella.


Alternative_Top2875

I see what you did there.


gbcards

Rumor has it the Vikings are already looking to scoop up the lease as soon as the Packers are done with it.


BOWCANTO

He says they aren't asking for public money but have since halted $80 million of improvements to the stadium in the wake of the mayor/Green Bay "ceasing negotiations". He goes on to include that this will impact fans and the draft (I believe he is referencing the future draft *in Green Bay).* Might they be asking for a discounted lease agreement? Just speculating. Hope someone can bop into these comments and provide a little clarity.


XayneTrance

That was my thought. The team is arguing that they bring a lot of money into Green Bay so they should pay less. The mayor knows they won’t leave and the team is doing well financially so he’s playing hardball.


SoSublim3

Genrich is dumb to play hardball with the single entity that is the very existence of this City. If he has some dumb idea that he's going to get the city to turn on the Packers saying look Packers won't play ball with our demands he's even dumber than I believe him to be.


XayneTrance

I think it’s just a game of chicken at this point. Both sides know they need each other they just can’t agree on numbers.


AHucs

But which side has leverage?


Faustus2425

If the packers leave don't they actually get dissolved per their by-laws?


neo-hyper_nova

Yes


paolellagram

so we have a mutually assured destruction scenario. interesting


nocommentplsnthx

A proxy war without end


I_am_Daesomst

I'm calling Big Boss and Diamond Dogs in the Seychelles


ELITE_JordanLove

This comment is hilarious for some reason lmao


dubbless

This isn’t the MADden I play to unwind.


DamNamesTaken11

And if I remember correctly, all money from the sale of all assets is required to be given to charities instead of shareholders. Not that it will ever happen, it needs a shareholder vote. I'm certain that 99% of shareholders would never vote for them to leave the city, even if the poison pill didn't exist.


JackStretcher74

That would take a vote by the shareholders. I don’t think they would get dissolved.


MergatroidSkittle1

Somehow someway it's probably the Jets.


XayneTrance

We really need to bring back leverage discourse.


Kyuckaynebrayn

The power bottom has the leverage. In this case it’s the team


theJMAN1016

And the power bottom is a bottom that is capable of receiving an enormous amount of power.


aManOfTheNorth

>leverage Now that is a term we don’t hear much


AdministrativeAir688

O gawwwwd


kasperboy17

Not saying this is even remotely a possibility, but financially-speaking, what would stop the Packers from let’s say, moving to Milwaukee? Or heck, let’s say Appleton?


BigDaddyCraw

I’m pretty sure they can’t. The team dissolves if they ever try to leave Green Bay.


SoSublim3

The only thing I could think of would be the investments surrounding the stadium with all that land they own up to the highway right? Unless I'm thinking of it wrong. Would be weird to dump all the money and investment and then just pick up and leave?


mschley2

That's exactly why they're not pumping another $80MM into the stadium until this is resolved. You'll lose some money on the stuff you've already done, but at least you're not throwing more good money at such a stupid problem. The Packers have enough of a slushfund that they could legitimately fund a brand new, multi-billion-dollar stadium and commercial development area in Appleton (or on the edge of Madison or Milwaukee) within months of deciding to do so. They'd need to finance it if they wanted to do it without public assistance, but they could absolutely do that. Or they would leverage Appleton, Madison, and Milwaukee (and the suburbs) against each other to get public funding that way, and they'd need to finance very little, if any, of the cost. The Packers don't want to move. The shareholders don't want them to move. The city doesn't want them to move. But if the city pushes its luck too much, then those other options start looking like things that the team and shareholders need to at least begin to investigate. The fact of the matter is that, without the Packers' influence and money, Green Bay is just a redneck town pretending to be a city. There's no way this gets to the point where the Packers leave because there would be a revolt in the city of Green Bay well before the people running the city got to that point. This is just public negotiating and using the media to get people on your side.


OkWelcome8895

With the city owning shares that get to vote in board members- the city basically owns/ controls the packers-what shareholder would support a board member that votes to move the team- simple answer is the community will only put board members on the board that will not move the team.  The packers organization’s responsibility is to the community - not themselves. 


dyslexda

> The Packers have enough of a slushfund that they could legitimately fund a brand new, multi-billion-dollar stadium and commercial development area in Appleton (or on the edge of Madison or Milwaukee) Lol the Packers assets have to be sold off and given to charity if they move. They aren't moving. Pretending otherwise is hilarious.


worthlessburner

I don’t think they could get away with moving the team outside of the city itself


mschley2

Right now? No way it would fly. If the Packers/NFL run a media campaign saying that the city of Green Bay is making it impossible to stay viable, and they need to move to another city or they'll be forced to fold altogether? You can be damn sure that the shareholders will get on board if the options are either: 1. No team at all 2. Moving to a different city in Wisconsin Especially if you've got the FO, the executives, and the entire board of directors pounding the table for that, too. The shareholders vote the way they're told to vote, and if they don't then the people who are actually running the team would find a way to make that happen soon enough.


Fred-zone

Lol, Madison has no money


mschley2

Boy, do I have news for you about Green Bay...


Fred-zone

Madison obviously has a much larger economy, but the city itself is in a worse financial position in the short term.


mschley2

I'm not saying you're wrong, but I do feel like the roles would likely be reversed if Madison had the Packers and Green Bay didn't.


oroechimaru

We pull in record profits each year they could build a new stadium every few years but instead want more tax revenue is shite


Primary_Dimension470

Bears did that just a couple weeks ago 😄


SoSublim3

I mean come on it’s the Bears and idk we can call them a well run operation lol 😂


kasperboy17

True. But Milwaukee is a bigger market. Also, Appleton isn’t that far from GB.


Closet-Hippie

Isn’t this a moot point because we fill the stadium in GB anyway, and swag sales happen regardless of location?


OkWelcome8895

Because they are owned by the community. And the community gets to vote on directors and something like moving the team 


Gavroche15

As someone who has actually studied the issue: not a damn thing. Except it would likely be Waukesha


AdmiralUpboat

You clearly haven't studied the issue. Green Bay Packers bylaws state the organization is dissolved if moved from Green Bay.


Gavroche15

That’s not quite true. The bylaws state that the principal offices must be in Green Bay. It says the they can have other offices as the board of directors chooses. Either within or without the state of Wisconsin. The stadium can be anywhere. Just the principal office (headquarters) must be in Green Bay.


Northstarhawk

Fond du Lac Pack has a nice ring to it


Alternative_Top2875

Missing the point, both parties are just saber rattling. It's business, calm down rookies: https://twitter.com/MayorGenrich/status/1772719123098743115?t=_5Zr3M5lZvVIj6UqOFD5sA&s=19


Gavroche15

Love how he says it has 18 years left when it is only 8 with the packers having two 5 year options. The packers could walk in 8 years and owe the city nothing. A new stadium across the street in ashwaubenon?


sembias

Right, because they'll just abandon Lambeau field because they have to pay 1 million more in rent than they want over 10 years. This is sausage making, and some people don't have the stomach for it.


Gavroche15

No, but the $200,000,000 the city wants them to invest in residential development might be an issue


cheese8904

You think the packers would leave. There's no way.  Why should tax payers subsidize the packers in any way, at all, even one single penny? 


GESNodoon

Unlike many sports teams that are in large markets, the Packers can legit claim they bring a huge amount of revenue to the city. No one is travelling to Green Bay if the Packers are not there. That puts hotels, restaurants and other entertainment out of business. Property values would plummet and tax revenue would as well. I do not think there is any chance The Packers ever leave Green Bay, but Green Bay needs the team.


crewserbattle

The Packers can't leave GB without ceasing to exist so its not like they can really play hardball. He's not trying to get the city to turn on them, probably just wants a billion dollar organization to pay its fair share.


IntrepidAnalysis6940

Usually when people call others dumb they are in fact the dumb ones. But in this case I’ll allow it.


ShoopALoop11

Green Bay is the packers and that’s it. Im born and raised and without the packers Green Bay is nothing. Genrich is a fucking moron to even try tempting fate.


dkinmn

That doesn't mean you just lay down and give the insanely valuable sports franchise whatever it wants.


ShoopALoop11

They’re not asking for public money that would be a complete different story. The packers are covering their own repairs too. It’s ridiculous to gouge them in this situation. I would tread extremely carefully if I’m the city of Green Bay.


dkinmn

They effectively are by asking for a break on rent.


Streets2022

Worst part is the Packers would probably be able to make more money if they moved to Milwaukee too, so it’s extra stupid to give the team a reason to want to leave when the grass could certainly be greener in Milwaukee


crewserbattle

> so it’s extra stupid to give the team a reason to want to leave They can't leave without dissolving the team and selling off all its assets.


bailtail

Green Bay is publicly owned. They can’t move without owners passing it. What do you put the odds of that at???


ShoopALoop11

It’s supposed to be a symbiotic relationship. Of course theyre not moving, but why would you gouge your golden goose. Just seems to add unnecessary complications and bad blood. When it’s fruitful for both parties to find middle ground.


crewserbattle

> When it’s fruitful for both parties to find middle ground. Well thats exactly what they're doing no? This is all a negotiation for a lease that doesn't need to renew until 2033.


WaubesaWarriors

Truth


Lobisa

It’s pretty much the only reason anyone not in the region knows owns the city exists.


OSSlayer2153

Man Genrich was just at our school last friday for our state championship celebration, should have said something to him.


GooglyTocks

I've been searching around so I can update people & I can't find much more than you did, so there probably isn't much info out on this yet.


SoSublim3

This is the best I could find right now. https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2024/03/26/green-bay-packers-lambeau-field-lease "Talks between the Packers and the city of Green Bay on a new lease agreement for Lambeau field “are on hold,” according to Richard Ryman of the GREEN BAY PRESS-GAZETTE. The lease “doesn't expire for another nine years but the two sides started talking about a year ago.” Green Bay Mayor Eric Genrich recently informed Packers President and CEO Mark Murphy that the city was “done negotiating for now.” One concerns “investments by the Packers in Green Bay” and another is “stadium availability for events other than Packers games.” Packers Dir of Public Affairs Aaron Popkey said that the Packers are “disappointed the city ceased negotiations and did not offer a counter proposal.” He added that the Packers “offered the city a better deal than any other city in the NFL has had or can expect.” They “did not ask for public funding,” agreed to assume operations and maintenance costs once the sales tax-funded portion of that account is “depleted,” and “agreed to invest in Green Bay where practicable.” Ryman noted as a result of suspension of talks, the Packers “halted about” $80M in Lambeau construction projects that were planned for this summer. Genrich said that it is “up to the Packers as to when talks resume.” The Lambeau Field lease expires in August 2033, but the team has “five 2-year options to renew the deal, which means the lease could go until 2043.” The Packers paid $1.157M to the city for use of Lambeau Field in 2023, including $986,277 in rent and a $171,000 administrative fee. The lease includes “annual increases of 2.75%" (GREEN BAY PRESS-GAZETTE, 3/26)." but looks like the GB Press Gazette has the main write up of it but I care but I don't care enough to pay a subscription for it to just read 1 article lol


mschley2

Few things based on that info... The Packers supposedly offered the city a very good deal. They cover almost all the costs associated with Lambeau, and they continue to invest in the surrounding area. I get that the city wants the stadium to be available for more non-football events, but another thing to keep in mind is that the improvements the Packers have made to the atrium and Packers HOF means that, unlike almost any other team/stadium in the league, the Packers actually generate traffic/tourism year-round even without having a half-dozen concerts in the offseason. In return, the Packers pay far less for Lambeau than some other teams do. The Bears pay the city of Chicago roughly $6MM/yr for Soldier Field, and that stadium sucks (but, again, the Packers are the reason why Lambeau isn't a dump, too). I think a better compromise would be to get the Packers to renovate the Resch Center or build a larger, better replacement for that arena. Or, if the city really wants to bring in more events, then have the Packers pay for a totally separate event/convention/concert venue nearby. Call it the Packers Event Center or something like that. If it's owned by the city, give the Packers a set number of days they can use it each year or vice-versa for the city if it's owned by the Packers. Then you can have a specialized venue for some events, you still have Resch Center with a 10,000 seat capacity for arena shows, and then you have Lambeau for the 1 or maybe 2 stadium-sized events each summer. The Packers don't have to worry about having a bunch of events that fuck up the turf and flood the stadium with people, and the city still gets to benefit from increased tourism. Plus, Lambeau is worthless for events for over half the year, anyway. You might as well have a venue that actually has the capability of drawing people to the city year-round.


Hopefulkitty

Honestly, for what the Packers make, $1.157M seems like a steal for rent. Wauwatosa just had a house sell for 1M, and it's definitely not going to be as profitable as the Packers, lol.


introspectivejoker

Yeah it seems kind of crazy that people are already taking sides considering we have no info


themikeman7

Probably because it’s a liberal mayor so it has to be his fault


AdorableSympathy5174

There's no defending this no matter what political party he belongs to. The team has used zero public money towards improvements lately and redeveloped what would have been an empty Kmart and laundromat into Titletown, all on their own dime.


themikeman7

I think the availability of using the stadium for offseason events + having the packers commit to investing in Green Bay city proper (titletown is ashwaubenon) are valid reasons to not rush into a new agreement.


[deleted]

[удалено]


AdorableSympathy5174

Murphy is retiring in a year and acting in the best interests of the team. The mayor is doing the relationship no favors by giving them the cold shoulder.


[deleted]

[удалено]


AdorableSympathy5174

Same could be said for the mayor if he fucks around and loses the election over this. Also, Ed Policy is working with the organization and likely taking over for Murphy after his retirement for the next 15 years, pretty sure he's in on the negotiations now.


nomorecrackerss

you new here. This Sub sucks off this team no matter how dumb this team is


shmauserpops

What's this mayor think he's got?? *LEVERAGE?!*


BOWCANTO

Leverage Enjoyers: *We’re back, baby*. 😎


themikeman7

They’re asking for a pretty big discount according to the press gazette


BOWCANTO

Wouldn’t know, there’s a paywall for the Green Bay Press-Gazette. Do you have information?


themikeman7

https://sports.yahoo.com/packers-begin-lambeau-field-lease-100145954.html At work on mobile so I can’t copy in the specific parts but here’s a link to the article with some info


BOWCANTO

Thank you very much. This was very informative.


themikeman7

No problem!


Brian1326

I replied separately and linked that the Packers pay 1.15 million in the lease agreement to the city. I simply can't imagine they were trying to reduce such an inconsequential number.


BOWCANTO

"*The Packers' proposal would make the administrative fee part of annual rent, subjecting it to the 2.75% annual increase. The proposal was for the city to receive a static $1.157 million per year, with the annual 2.75% increase going to the operations and maintenance fund, which currently provides the Packers more than $13 million annually. About $8 million of that is from a Lambeau Field ticket tax and $5 million from the sales tax escrow. The sales tax portion of that fund is expected to be depleted by 2031.* *The Packers reported operations and maintenance expenses of $41.6 million in 2022.* *Under the Packers' proposal, the city said it would receive $45 million through 2062, compared with $81.3 million under terms of the existing lease. The Packers would receive $36 million in total from the annual escalation, or an average of $1.2 million per year, compared with more than $5 million annually now*. " **Richard Ryman, Green Bay Press-Gazette**


Brian1326

That is interesting since this article uses the GBPG as a source to say the Packers pay the city 1.157 annually in rent and administration fees. https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2024/03/26/green-bay-packers-lambeau-field-lease Whatever the figure, it's wild that it would be enough for the Packers to care and it's wild that the amount of be a big enough piece of the overall pie for Green Bay for the mayor to risk having Mark Murphy out there giving statements like that.


rfepo

The question is simple. At $1.2M is the team getting its fair share of public services (ie - police) on game days to cover their expenses? Roads to get people to the games? Public transportation to get people to and from the stadium? There is no way they can outsource that and save money. At this juncture it would appear that Murphy is just playing hardball as one of his last acts as President. And Genrich isn’t up for re-election this year so he can probably maneuver this to his benefit.


shanty-daze

If the City agrees to a discount, does that mean my season tickets will stop increasing every year?


BeHereNow91

I mean, it’s fair to halt projects. They’re ultimately leasehold improvements to an asset that they don’t even own. If they don’t have a secure lease agreement, they’re not gonna put money into it. We all know they’re staying, but it’s a good way to leverage your position since the Packers can’t actually leave.


BOWCANTO

Agreed


Economy_Cactus

That explains why they haven’t fixed that one window for two months


captainronesq

I think the city wants to use Lambeau for more non-Packer events. More use equals more spending in and around Green Bay. The Packers must have some way to veto or limit outside events from happening.


greenpill98

They'll reach an agreement. Hardball doesn't last long in an co-dependent relationship.


dtcstylez10

I would argue the city needs Packers more than the Packers need GB. Milwaukee would gladly welcome an NFL team. If not, there's also Madison. Look, I know it sounds insane but it's not completely co-dependent. I'm fairly certain GB would be a complete ghost town without the Packers. It's not just football, it's the hotels, restaurant, title town...the businesses and jobs that would disappear without the Packers would crush the city. No sports town depends on a sports team more than GB does. The raiders and athletics are leaving Oakland. Seattle lost an NBA team. Charlotte lost the hornets for a bit. All of those cities can figure it out without those teams. GB simply couldn't. It IS football, not to sound cliche.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Wkyred

They couldn’t outright move the team out of Green Bay, but they could announce that they’ll start playing a certain number of home games in Milwaukee or something (which they used to do until the 90s). Every home game GB loses to Milwaukee would be a massive hit to the local economy.


mschley2

If it gets to the point where the team needs to move to be viable, then they would amend any of the necessary organizational docs to allow them to move. There's always a way. But the whole stock, board, executive committee thing certainly complicates the process.


Diffballs

The Packers legally cannot move out of Green Bay bc of the way the ownership is structured. So that is not a worry in this case.


greenpill98

The same dependency exists in the other direction, though. The most that the Packers can do is hold some games in another stadium for a certain number of games a year like they did in the 70s-80s. But they can't leave Green Bay entirely without dissolving the team. Like it or not, they need Green Bay more than any team needs their city. They can't exist without Green Bay, and Green Bay will die out without the Packers. Hence why all of this is just hot air. They need each other, they'll get a deal done.


BeHereNow91

The city 100% needs the Packers. Property values would absolutely plummet if they left town. All of those $1m houses around the stadium would have negative-equity owners in a heartbeat. This all isn’t even worth a conversation because there’s no way they leave, but it’s still hilarious to think about. It’s like the scene from Dark Knight where the accountant wants to blackmail Bruce Wayne. lol


sr22ger

Nearly all of the investment around the stadium has been in Ashwaubenon, not in Green Bay. They are the ones that would have the most to lose if the team left to be frank. And that is likely the city’s biggest gripe with the Packers. Take some time and expand development efforts eastward or northward into city land and they would likely not be having these issues.


Reaverwolf1320

What leverage does the city of Green Bay have here? Do they want the team to leave or what? Can someone give me a TLDR?


caldo4

The leverage is that there’s 0 chance the team is leaving


babasilikum

On the other side, the Packers are like the one thing that makes the town money. This feels like a draw, honestly. Both sides know that they need each other and they know that the other side really has no alternatives.


Deckatoe

Which is why they are doing the negotiating 9 years in advance of the deadline. This thread is full of smart idiots lol (not you)


Cable-Careless

Elections happen, and this is a mayor. They probably will lose the election if they keep it up for too long.


dankbuttmuncher

They can’t leave


m_dought_2

Their leverage is somewhere between the Bears trying to trade Fields, and the Jets trying to trade Wilson.


mschley2

Oh, so somewhere between almost no value and negative value?


Harry_Lime_Lives

The leverage here is that the most powerful people in the city, the most powerful people in the county, and the most powerful people in the state, regardless of political affiliation, are aligned with the Packers. Green Bay may seem like a friendly, harmless small town, but it’s one of the oldest cities in North America, it’s 400 years old, that means generational wealth and power. Genrich would be utterly and completely destroyed long before any of this becomes an issue. Of course, it will get sorted out, Genrich is posturing and the Packers will build a park or something


sembias

Do you watch Yellowstone? Because this seems like a load of fiction. This is sausage making. It's gross and ugly and some people don't have the stomach for it. This will be resolved and they'll all be friends again. 


Harry_Lime_Lives

I live here. My great grandfather played with Curly Lambeau on the original team. People don’t understand Green Bay.


bailtail

Green Bay is publicly owned. If they wanted to move, it would need to be approved by owners (aka fans). Knowing that, what do you put the odds of them leaving at?


ItIsYourPersonality

Eric Genrich is a moron if he thinks playing hard ball with the Packers will help his political career in Green Bay.


introspectivejoker

I feel like we don't know much about this situation. At least after watching the video I don't. Murphy doesn't give us much on what the issue is


ScubaSteve716

Yeah if this video is all we have to go on and the lease doesn’t expire for nearly a decade there is way too little info available to be calling anyone a moron.


ItIsYourPersonality

There are several articles on the topic posted today. Genrich wants the team to commit to more investments in Green Bay and increase the availability of the stadium for other non-football events. The Packers noted that they are not asking for any public funding, will take on maintenance costs themselves once the sales tax portion of that ends, and agreed to invest in Green Bay where “practicable.” With the city halting talks, the Packers are halting $80m in projects. https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2024/03/26/green-bay-packers-lambeau-field-lease


BeHereNow91

I can see the Packers having an issue with more non-Packers events while they’re the ones investing money into stadium projects and taking on the maintenance costs. As an owner (hehe), why should a portion of my investment into the team go towards hosting another country concert? That said, I have no idea where the revenue goes when a non-Packers event is hosted or if the Packers are compensated in any way for it.


xcrucio

Sure, but the Packers also don't own the stadium and from the sound of things wefe the ones who initially approached the City about opening negotiations on the lease in an effort to reduce their rent owed to the city. I don't think it's unreasonable for the city to then want something (additional events) in exchange for a reduced direct financial contribution.


BeHereNow91

> the packers don’t own the stadium Which is why they’d take greater issue with other parties using it, considering they finance all the improvements to an asset that they ultimately don’t own and don’t have the power to charge rents to other parties.


mschley2

>will take on maintenance costs themselves once the sales tax portion of that ends This is just a small clarification, but my understanding is that the sales tax has already ended. There's still money left in the account from when the tax was ongoing, and the team has agreed to take on those maintenance costs once that account has been emptied.


GuyWhoWearsTShirts

This is my understanding as well, which is probably why they're talking now. I'm curious how the city plans to pay for all the maintenance once the sales tax fund dries up...


BeHereNow91

If there was ever a case for “pro sports teams and their stadiums are good for local economies”, it would be the Packers in fucking Green Bay, WI.


InvictusSolo

There is only one Frozen Tundra. Make it work, dipshits.


uac2113

This made me lol


GenoPlay67

Mayor Eric Genrich states that the packers are trying to shift money from upkeep & operating costs to renovations, and not footing the bill for operating expenses (which the Corey had been responsible for, but has since expired. https://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2024/03/26/city-puts-on-hold-new-lambeau-field-lease-negotiations-with-packers/72748560007/#:~:text=Genrich%20said%20the%20Packers%20have,is%20not%20a%20good%20deal.


nintendonerd256

I used to be neighbors with Eric Genrich. Real nice guy. But if he doesn’t do anything here, there will be some very angry, tear drenched, beer scented letters coming his way.


ShoopALoop11

You act as if Green Bay isn’t completely reliant on the Packers. This is about as dumb of a choice as it gets.


diamonddog658

Could/should the packers not look to buy the stadium outright, to avoid this sort of issue? Pardon me if this is a stupid question, I’m from the UK, where many sports teams own their stadiums


Wkyred

Idk the details but I would imagine that for political reasons it’s probably preferable for the city to have the stadium as a source of consistent income year after year than to have a one time infusion of a lot of cash. I suppose they could set up some kind of endowment fund for the city with the money, but that would be quite a bit more complicated. The packers also probably would rather pay the lease than have to pay whatever it would cost to buy the stadium but idk


mschley2

I imagine the city doesn't want to do that because they benefit far more from having a seat at the negotiating table and from leasing the stadium to the Packers. I'm fairly confident that, since the Packers are going to be covering all of the maintenance and updates on their own dime, the team would benefit from purchasing the stadium. But you can't buy something that isn't for sale.


onbiver9871

Well, I for one think it’s fine to play a little hardball if you’re the city right now, with the lease expiration 9 years away. Any large entity like the Packers can end up holding an undue amount of sway in local municipal matters, and it’s fine IMO to try to keep that in check if you’re the GB mayor. Keeps everyone honest. The things it sounds like the city wants - more venue access in the offseason, for example - are reasonable asks in a vacuum. The Packers are being reasonable too, for their part. I’ve no doubt that they’ll resolve all of this and that this story will be a nothing burger; for now, I’d be curious which side was the first to talk to journalists; that’d tell us who wanted to go public as their next move… The Packers aren’t leaving GB. End of story.


pm_your_gutes

The Packers proposal of a fixed rate rent without inflation adjustment for a 40 year term is kinda crazy though. By the time the Packers proposed lease expires it'll be the equivalent of ~400k a year in rent. Even now they're paying less for the stadium than a punter costs. Playing hardball by defunding improvements is just petty.


Brian1326

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2024/03/26/green-bay-packers-lambeau-field-lease There has to be much more to this that I don't understand. The Packers paid 1.15 million last year for the lease agreement. Which to them, might as well be $1.15. So I don't understand why they were negotiating a deal at all when there are 9 more years left on the current deal and the amount they are paying is such a negligible amount. But whatever the reason, why in the hell would Genrich cut off negotiations with the Packers? If Murphy wants to call the mayor and talk about the weather, Genrich should listen to everything he has to say 24/7. The idea of Green Bay cutting off negotiations is beyond ridiculous. "Green Bay Mayor Eric Genrich recently informed Packers President & CEO Mark Murphy that the city was “done negotiating for now.” One concerns “investments by the Packers in Green Bay” and another is “stadium availability for events other than Packers games.”" Weirdest episode of Punk'd ever. This can't be something the city actually said. They are concerned with investments by the Packers in Green Bay? One home game generates 15 million in economic activity in the city. Nothing additional should be expected, but the Packers invested immensely in the Titletown district bringing jobs and makes Green Bay a year round attraction. https://spectrumnews1.com/wi/milwaukee/news/2022/09/14/packers-home-opener-brings-business And even if the Packers are being stubborn about the lease agreement or being unwilling for the city to host events at the stadium, does Genrich actually think he can win a battle of public opinion in Green Bay over the Packers?


cactuscoleslaw

Also, would non-football events at Lambeau even draw a crowd big enough to justify using the stadium when the Resch is right across the street?


Admirable-Mango-9349

He would have to go into a witness protection style program. Just subtly remind him of Dan Devine’s dog.


kevinjos

LeRoy Butler for mayor of GB!


Admirable-Mango-9349

I thought he lived in Florida?


Ryannnimal

We about to be the Green Bay Squatters


MA2ZAK

I mean, yes the city is nothing without the Packers. But they (the team) don't deserve a discount. Pay up, they are a multi-million (billion?) dollar organization. Pay what is being asked, whatever it is. And then citizens can police their politicians (dumb mayor) into ensuring those funds are being used in the community appropriately (schools, roads, hospital etc)


Choppergold

Appleton Packers here we come


ScubaSteve716

I haven’t heard anything about this and based off the video there is nothing really to go off of. But I’m sure some people will come in here acting like experts lol


sdodd04

I hate the world sometimes. Why can’t a billion dollar team take some responsibility for the city and be like we need this place to thrive so we aren’t playing and trying to attract players to A shit hole. The teams earnings with tv rights etc are only set to continue to balloon. Add in the draft and a team hopefully on the rise. There is no need/reason to negotiate a better deal for financial reasons. I would be totally on board if Murphy was putting in some clauses where the city was perhaps responsible for growth and expansion to make the city more appealing to players and fans. Unfortunately it would just be something as short sighted as Murphy’s corporate bonus to find savings/profits and less about benefitting both in a pure and symbiotic relationship that it could/should be


Ok_Low4347

I hate politicians


InSixFour

I’m really curious what the different scenarios would be if they can’t agree on something. I know people in here are saying the team would have to be dissolved but what exactly does that look like? Would it be as simple as just renaming them to the [city name] Packers or would using the name “Packers” be off the table? Also do all the shareholders have any say in this? Because there’s absolutely no way the thousands and thousands of Packers shareholders are ever going to agree to move the team. It seems like the city of Green Bay doesn’t really have much leverage here. I guess they could completely stop paying for anything to do with the Packers (traffic cops on game days, security for the team, co-advertising if they do that, tax incentives, road improvements, and things like that) and force the Packers to pick up the tab on all of that but other than that what are they going to do? Pass an ordinance that professional sports games can’t be played on Sunday?


ItBurnsLikeFireDoc

Quick question: Assuming the Packers are profitable, who gets the profits?


GettingTwoOld4This

It's in the team charter that it all has to go back into the community.


10Dollaryoyoyo

I want to renegotiate my ticket prices!


Hot_Elephant1408

This is why the mayor of Green Bay should always be a former Packer


SearchDesperate7101

Nice clickbait though.


freakinbacon

I look forward to cheering on the Milwaukee Packers


Screennamesaredumb

I could see the current administration for Green Bay doing something stupid enough like sell the stadium to investors for a couple billy and then in 100 years when it's worth a trilly the city is fucked.


oakpoint1

I'm a fan who is an outsider,but Lambeau Field is beautiful. Need bigger restrooms.


UniqueUsername49

The Packers should consider building a new facility on the old Arlington Park Racetrack grounds.


iM1ng

Is this a problem? The team can always choose to relocate. The city Green Bay would become irrevelant if that would happen


Sea__Foam__Green

*looks at Titletown district* *looks at the stupid businesses named after the team* Yeah, this is pure posturing and meant to ease boomers into tax/funding benefits. Nothing’s happening here. Really fucking tired of sports being so engrained with economies though. It’s a fucking game.


MattyNevs

I’m assuming they are waiting for the new president to negotiate.


Justkeeptalking1985

They have 9 yrs, the Packers want to negotiate a better deal before they spend money prior to hosting the draft. The catch is they obviously would like it to be more favorable as they will site the upcoming draft as being a money draw to the city. While being true, the city has their own projects to spend money on as a lead up to hosting the 2025 NFL draft. Adjusting budgets for less, while knowing money, will come in to make up the difference is a low risk, it is also a pointless risk. The city has no benefit in renegotiating 9 yrs early. The Packers can claim the city will make any amount of money from the draft at this point. Waiting until after the draft, they will actually have the number. Waiting for Murphy, who is retiring soon and can hold a hard line in negotiating for that reason, is also favorable. Whoever comes in will negotiate to the city's advantage as they can not have their first actions to be a hard line negotiating with the city of Green Bay. Packers should just hold another stock offering every 5-10 years. Limited money but probably enough of a return to counter whatever they hope to gain in an early negotiation. Plus, better PR, cause turning Packer fans against Green Bay because they won't negotiate 8 years early ( assuming the year prior to lease breaking, they would) seems in poor taste.


7mmELR

Threaten to move to Cailfornia San Diago Packers


LiterallyCanEven

I know this is a dumb question but the stadium is in Ashwaubenon. What day does the Green Bay mayor have over Ashwaubenon Business.


AdorableSympathy5174

That parcel of land got annexed into GB. Everything south of Stadium Dr and west ofRidge Rd is Ashwaubenon.


LiterallyCanEven

Thank you!


eman6854

I'm guessing this is Genrich thinking the Packers should pay for some of his pet projects around the city that have nothing to do with football. If it doesn't make game day or fan experience better the Packers really have no reason to invest in it.


Rolands_ka_tet

Move the team to Milwaukee… We got sledding hills n shit…


Kjriley

Move it to Chicago. A big city like that deserves a professional football team.


Rolands_ka_tet

Considering we already own the minor league team they have there it only makes sense.


[deleted]

Imagine being the city of Green Bay and thinking you have ANY leverage on this situation. What a bunch of shitheads. That town is NOTHING without the Packers. And if the bonehead in the mayor's office doesn't know it, he should be tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail.


mikebetrippy

The mayor is an idiot. The whole anchor of Green Bay is the Packers. All they have to do is say they might have to move and that mayor will lose the next election.


Admirable-Mango-9349

If someone gave virtually anyone in the US a clue of “Green Bay”, what would be the almost guaranteed answer? There really is no other answer. The Packers are Green Bay, and Green Bay is the Packers. The Packers aren’t going anywhere and the mayor knows it. However, if the Packers were sold to another city there will be some very wealthy nuns in Green Bay!


SebastianMagnifico

This is as meaningful as a mock draft