Pro Bowl: Miami vs Hawaii

[Frankie's Market]

Larry Beil and a panel give their take on the pros and cons of the NFL taking the Pro Bowl to Miami this year and playing it one week before (rather than after) the Super Bowl.

Opinions are divided among NFL players when it comes to their feelings about the Pro Bowl being held in Miami after a 30 year run at Aloha Stadium.

[Ron Whitfield]

Re: Pro Bowl: Miami vs Hawaii

There was a Pro Bowl this year?

[Walkoff Balk]

Re: Pro Bowl: Miami vs Hawaii

It's better for football fans that the Pro Bowl is before the Super Bowl. The Super Bowl is a climax of the season.

[Random]

Re: Pro Bowl: Miami vs Hawaii

It's better for football fans that the Pro Bowl is before the Super Bowl. The Super Bowl is a climax of the season.

So long half of the roster comes from the teams in the upcoming Super Bowl, and they all have to be starters (including their respective QBs).

Yes, even football fans can be sinister.

[Walkoff Balk]

Re: Pro Bowl: Miami vs Hawaii

The Miami Pound Machine vs. Willie K den at halftime.

[TuNnL]

Re: Pro Bowl: Miami vs Hawaii

It looks like Miami might have another big-time supporter in its corner: Hawai‘i Gov. Neil Abercrombie. Apparently, the governor doesn’t think much of the Pro Bowl, and said as much in a public beatdown of Pro Bowl “millionaires and billionaires”:

Abercrombie wants to sack Pro Bowl payments
Brooks Baehr — Hawaii News Now

The HTA reported the 2011 Pro Bowl in February generated $28.15 million in visitor spending and $3.07 million in state tax revenue from people who came to the islands just for the game.

We asked Abercrombie to weigh money the game generated against the $4 million paid by the HTA.

“Oh please. You know we’ll get more out of civil unions in a weekend than we'll get out of those guys.”

Oh please, Neil. Your buffoonary is nauseating.

[helen]

Re: Pro Bowl: Miami vs Hawaii

Look at it this way if the state pays $4 million for whatever event and gets back only $3.07 million from it directly then one has to wonder what had to be cut to make up for that missing $93,000. I sort of see Abercrombie point in this.

On the other hand if the state got up $4 million or more in tax revenue from the event then yeah spending that money would be worth the effort.

[Ron Whitfield]

Re: Pro Bowl: Miami vs Hawaii

The NFL has been extorting this state long enuf. 4 mil is nothing these days to NFL big wigs, but it's plenty to us when we're watching everything get cut. 1 in Neal's column.

[Frankie's Market]

Re: Pro Bowl: Miami vs Hawaii

What's most disturbing to me about this whole situation is that Gov. Neil doesn't seem to have any idea about what he's talking about.

"Oh, please. We will get more out of civil unions in a weekend than we will get out of those guys." (referring to the NFL)

Really? He thinks that the civil union measure will generate more than $28 million in visitor spending in one weekend? Oyyy!!!

If Abercrombie had presented a detailed financial analysis on the pros and cons of hosting the Pro Bowl, then at least one could take his position seriously and engage in a debate. But unfounded statements like the quote above make it sound like he's just shooting from the hip and undermines his credibility.

Whatever one's position may be on whether taxpayer money should be going to the NFL, make no mistake. This game and the Honolulu Marathon are two of the most important events for the tourism industry, by far. When these events are in town, hotels, restaurants, and merchants generate their highest revenues for the year. From these two sporting crown jewels, there's a very sharp drop-off to the next tier of events like the Sony Open and the Hawaii Bowl.

And the benefits that the state receives from the NFL goes beyond tax revenue. The league has also pitched in with funds that paid for Field Turf installation at Aloha Stadium, renovations to Roosevelt High School's athletic complex, and a youth center in Nanakuli. Is our governor blind to how these contributions benefit young people in Hawaii?

Lucky for Neil that the topic of the Pro Bowl was never brought up in last year's round of debates. If he had expressed his sentiments back then, perhaps Mufi (warts and all) would have been elected instead.

[Ron Whitfield]

Re: Pro Bowl: Miami vs Hawaii

perhaps Mufi (warts and all) would have been elected instead.

That would have been a shame.
If the NFL has any brains they will accept the facts and continue having the Pro Bowl here every year.

[TuNnL]

Re: Pro Bowl: Miami vs Hawaii

Gov. Neil doesn't seem to have any idea about what he's talking about ... lucky for Neil that the topic of the Pro Bowl was never brought up in last year's round of debates. If he had expressed his sentiments back then, perhaps Mufi (warts and all) would have been elected instead.

Perhaps — although under that hypothetical situation, I think Mufi would still lose unless he avoided the “I look like you” gaffe and the compare and contrast flyer that lost him so many votes. But you have to note the irony and symbolism here.

On one side: clueless Abercrombie shooting from the hip and pissing on what Mufi — one of the more instrumental Pro Bowl political advocates — fought so hard to keep. On the other side: HTA, Local 5, heck, all the working people with families to feed that need the boost the Pro Bowl has proven to provide. It is astounding how out of touch Neil is with the average joe. Even if he was thinking what he said, he clearly could have used more tact.

[salmoned]

Re: Pro Bowl: Miami vs Hawaii

Not to take sides here, the governor may be off his rocker for all I know, but losing $930,000 is a lot less than the income we have from civil unions (license fees). Civil unions (income) > Pro Bowl (loss). So the governor actually has made sense on this issue.

P.S. - "The state's five-year contract, which pays the NFL about $4 million a game, expires with the 2009 Pro Bowl."

"The 2008 Pro Bowl generated about $28 million in visitor spending and $2.5 million in state taxes."

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d...wl-is-wasteful

Answer to below - Yes, we pay up front and it has been a losing deal for years, at least! However, that figure may not include indirect taxes paid.

[helen]

Re: Pro Bowl: Miami vs Hawaii

I was thinking about this but is the state of Hawaii actually paying the NFL $4 million up front to hold the Pro Bowl here? Or is that amount the state of Hawaii would have collected from the NFL for renting out Aloha Stadium for the event as well as the cost for paying the people's wages who working during the event?

Another factor to consider is if the Pro Bowl has always been a losing money thing for the state (in terms of tax revenue) or is just this past year that it was a loss for the state?

[Frankie's Market]

Re: Pro Bowl: Miami vs Hawaii

Not to take sides here, the governor may be off his rocker for all I know, but losing $930,000 is a lot less than the income we have from civil unions (license fees). Civil unions (income) > Pro Bowl (loss). So the governor actually has made sense on this issue.

P.S. - "The state's five-year contract, which pays the NFL about $4 million a game, expires with the 2009 Pro Bowl."

"The 2008 Pro Bowl generated about $28 million in visitor spending and $2.5 million in state taxes."

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d...wl-is-wasteful

Answer to below - Yes, we pay up front and it has been a losing deal for years, at least! However, that figure may not include indirect taxes paid.

Not to mention the fact that the Pro Bowl telecast serves as a promotional/marketing vehicle for Hawaii on national TV. How much would it cost to air standalone Hawaiian tourism commercials that would reach the same number of people as the Pro Bowl audience? Better believe that is worth some serious $$$$.

And also, how many jobs are created by the $28.15 million boost in visitor spending? Whatever that number is, you can subtract it from whatever our state would otherwise spend on unemployment compensation.

I think it is safe to say that the state's investment of $4 million to the NFL yields significantly more return than the $3.07 million in tax revenue.

As I said previously, everyone is entitled to their viewpoint on whether $4 million of taxpayer money should be spent on the NFL. But that decision should be based upon a broader and more informed look at the Pro Bowl's total economic impact to our state.

[salmoned]

Re: Pro Bowl: Miami vs Hawaii

Sorry FM, we pay for that advertising as an additional expense. Also, I doubt we get any unemployment compensation benefit for the part-time jobs created, but we do get additional income from business and personal income taxes that aren't included in the stated figures [if that income is reported ].