Browns Unveil Historic $2.4 Billion Stadium Plans
The Cleveland Browns announced this week the official plans of building a new $2.4 billion domed stadium in Brook Park, Ohio that seats up to 70,000 on Sundays.
Advertisement
The development will be Ohio's first enclosed stadium, opening up the area to host various events like the Super Bowl, NCAA Final Four, large-scale concerts, and more.
It is also a historic advantage coming to AFC North. The Browns' new home will be the first domed stadium in the division, giving Cleveland an upper hand over the Baltimore Ravens, Cincinnati Bengals and Pittsburgh Steelers when it comes to weather during home games.
The Browns social media team released a detailed blueprint diagram of the state-of-the-art mockups of "New Huntington Bank Field".
"As Northeast Ohio continues to evolve, the New Huntington Bank Field enclosed stadium will stand as an iconic symbol of the innovation, resiliency, and bold spirit of our region. It will be truly transformational, a first of its kind in the NFL, redefining the architecture of stadiums and fan-centric design. The New Huntington Bank Field enclosed stadium will shape the trajectory of our region for generations to come not just as a stadium, but as a reflection of our community, our economy, and our identity," the Browns wrote on the team website.
Advertisement
Around the stadium grounds, there will be a full entertainment district that will have programming year-round. "The mixed-used development will create Northeast Ohio's most unique live, work, and play neighborhood and drive a fiscal and economic impact the state and region has never experienced," said the Browns.
The site of New Huntington Bank Field in Brook Park is about a 20-minute drive southwest of the current stadium in downtown Cleveland. Mayor Justin Bibb is not exactly thrilled about the team moving out of the city.
'We are deeply disappointed that the final state budget includes both a $600 million public subsidy for a domed stadium in Brook Park and changes to Ohio's [Art] Modell Law — provisions we strongly opposed and requested be removed,' Bibb said Tuesday, via WKYC.com. 'Relocating the Browns will divert economic activity from downtown, create a competing entertainment district, and disrupt the momentum of our lakefront redevelopment.'
According to NBC, "the change to the Art Modell Law allows Ohio teams to move within Ohio. Given that the Ohio legislature created the initial law after the Browns moved to Baltimore in 1996, it seems that there's little room for Cleveland to fight the legislature's decision to change the law."
Advertisement
The $600 million of public funding may also hinder the development.
Despite the Browns already selling season tickets for the new stadium, which is expected to open in 2029 according to Sportico, "there's a chance that Ohio will have to scrap the plan to pay the $600 million via unclaimed funds and come up with an alternative approach," Pro Football Talk added.
Browns owner Jimmy Haslem spoke on the Building Brownstone podcast explaining the vision behind this new stadium and the benefits it will provide to the people of Northeast Ohio.
For more information, visit dome.clevelandbrowns.com.
Related: Browns' Myles Garrett 'Trending Toward Best Season' in 2025
This story was originally reported by Athlon Sports on Jul 2, 2025, where it first appeared.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
19 minutes ago
- New York Times
Will the NFL ever offer ‘Sunday Ticket' on a single-team basis? Sports Media Mailbag (Part 2!)
Welcome to the 42nd Media Mailbag for The Athletic. Thanks for sending in your questions via the website and app. There were nearly 100 questions, so this was a two-parter. Part 1 ran Tuesday. As a Jets fan who lives in Pennsylvania, the only way to watch all Jets games is to purchase a very expensive full NFL TV package. While I purchase single-team packages to watch the Mets, Knicks and Rangers for a reasonable annual fee, I skip watching NFL football on Sunday afternoons in the fall. Any chance the NFL will ever implement a single-team option that provides all the games for one team at a fair price? Great question. I personally don't think there's any chance the NFL would do that because the scarcity of the product is what drives the billions paid by the media rights holders. But I wanted to get someone who has worked at the networks for insight, so I forwarded your question to Patrick Crakes, a former Fox Sports senior vice president who now works as a media consultant. This is a long answer so stay with it. Advertisement 'I understand this sentiment, but I just don't see a route to single NFL team out-of-market season passes,' Crakes said. 'The core issue here is how game inventory is valued for different leagues. For the NBA, NHL and MLB team season passes, the game inventory is monetized regionally with telecast partners across six-month-long regular seasons. In contrast, 100 percent of the 272 NFL's regular season games are monetized nationally to include the majority of games that air during Sunday daytime and are regionalized across two windows (1:00 pm and 4:25 p.m. ET). This works out to only 17 regular season games for each team across only 18 weeks. 'This scarcity in game inventory combined with the extreme viewing demand for the NFL means every single regular season game has national strategically significant economic value for the most important media distribution platforms such as broadcast TV networks (ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC), top pay-TV channels (ESPN) and top streaming platforms (Amazon Prime Video, Google, Paramount+, Peacock and Netflix). These are the ones that can afford to pay $13.3B overall in 2024 alone for America's by far most popular and valuable media property. These mega-strategic NFL telecast partners need some type of exclusivity for their NFL investments. 'When you consider the NFL's requirement that there will always be a free over the air (OTA) broadcast signal for each game regardless of its national telecast partner, you can see how from the NFL's perspective they believe they're fully serving local and national fans while also serving out of market ultra fans,' Crakes continued. 'They believe the NFL Sunday Ticket on YouTubeTV remains the best way for the most passionate of NFL viewers to gain access to as many games on Sunday afternoons as possible while maximizing per game economics. 'If your anchor is the per-game pricing for a NBA, NHL or MLB regular-season local package then any such hypothetical NFL package is going to look astronomical by comparison. For example, MLB's most expensive team season local passes are around $120 annually or about 75 cents per game over 162 games. Taking the total paid by NFL telecasters ($13.3B) last year and dividing it by the total number of NFL regular season games (272), you get an individual NFL regular season game value of $48M. That figure alone should tell you that you're going to pay a significant premium for a NFL team season pass because the per-game value of your local team is derived via a national market and not local/regional one. Unfortunately, there's probably no route to single NFL team passes in the near future.' Advertisement Build your all-time dream broadcast booths for NBA and NFL, along with a studio show for NFL. – Brandon S. NBA: Ian Eagle, Charles Barkley and Jeff Van Gundy in the booth. Craig Sager on the sideline. NFL: Al Michaels, John Madden and Troy Aikman in the booth. Pam Oliver on the sideline. NFL studio show: Bob Costas, Howard Cosell, Peyton Manning, Amy Trask and Will McDonough. Are the 2030 US broadcast rights for the men's football (soccer) World Cup a must have for Fox? — Brian D. One of the most interesting sports rights acquisitions for me over the last 10 months was when Netflix secured the exclusive broadcast rights in the United States for the 2027 and 2031 editions of the Women's World Cup. The deal marked the first time the Women's World Cup will be broadcast on a streaming service. That feels very significant to me as we approach the rights for the 2030 men's World Cup. Games will be played in six countries: Co-hosts Spain, Portugal and Morocco as well as Uruguay, Paraguay, and Argentina. It's going to be massively expensive for a U.S. media rights holder if they want to staff it properly. The 2030 tournament will also have more inventory if the 64-team proposal goes through. I have no doubt Fox would want the property, but the question is the price. I don't think it's a must-have given the resources needed. I also would not be surprised if Netflix goes all-in. The one World Cup Fox always wanted is what they have — the 2026 men's World Cup. (BTW: I'd be fine with someone else doing the World Cup in the U.S. It could use a fresh set of eyes.) The prices of broadcast rights keeps going up. How much of that is due to inflation versus the actual value increase? — Martin D. You'd have to take it on a sport-by-sport basis for the best analysis, but let's look at the NBA/WNBA increases on its media deal. The new agreement — $77 billion over 11 years — is up more than 150 percent over the previous contract based on annual value. Whether these deals turn out to be good business for the media rights holders, we will see. But value is based on what someone is willing to pay versus global inflation trends. Advertisement 'Get off of my lawn' question here. The Stanley Cup playoffs just ended. Regardless of the great matchup in the Final, fan fatigue is a real thing, especially as the weather is warmer, and there is more to do aside from watching TV. Do the broadcast partners of the NHL care about the total length of the season and playoffs being simply too long, or do they just view it as 'inventory' where more is better? — John M. The recent news that the NHL and NHL Players' Association agreed to a four-year extension of the Collective Bargaining Agreement answers the question, given the deal increases the NHL regular season to 84 games per team. The NHL wants as much game inventory as possible because that has driven the media rights deals with ESPN/Turner Sports in the U.S. and Rogers in Canada. I do think viewer fatigue is a real thing, but there's no scenario I see where the postseason gets shortened. I would love to see the playoff format become either '1 versus 16' league-wide or '1 versus 8' in the conferences. I feel like when I turn to sports TV lately it's a lot of one big opinion versus another and tends to devolve from there. What's it going to take to get back to classic ESPN-style fun highlights and funny commentary nightly? Am I looking in the wrong places? — Matt B. The majority of what airs at night is live-game inventory, and that's not going to feature debate television. But opinion is very cheap to produce — you already own the studio/building so your biggest cost is talent. It's also the easiest television to do. Sports isn't alone in this. Look at what CNN's primetime lineup has become. Certainly pre- and post-game shows focus on opinions, but that's usually connected to the game. The days of SportsCenter being unique have long been over. Highlights are accessible everywhere. We live in a different world. My friendly advice is to find sports podcasts that offer what you are looking for, and there are plenty of good ones out there. Can we call on all sports announcers to cease describing the next play, game, golf shot etc… with words such as huge, important, crucial, critical. I understand they are trying to add a level of excitement, but when it is said a thousand times during a broadcast it becomes beyond insufferable. — Michael H. I can see that this is a critical and important question for you. I imagine if you are listening for those specific words, you will hear them a lot. But never forget, sports broadcasters are ALWAYS in the business of selling the product. One of the objectives is to keep you watching. Do the new WNBA broadcast media contracts come with professional announcer teams rather than home-team announcers? A very high percentage are insufferable. Right now it seems only ESPN has real announcers. Rebecca Lobo and Ryan Ruocco do a really good, objective job. I've also heard Debbie Antonelli on ION. She's got credibility from years in the game and does pretty well too. Don't know if she's a home-teamer or not. —J.M. When you watch the WNBA on ION or NBA TV, you are getting the local broadcast. When you watch ESPN/ABC, you are getting the national broadcasters such as Lobo, Ruocco, LaChina Robinson, etc… I watch a lot of WNBA League Pass, and there are a lot of homer broadcasts out there. I agree with you. Antonelli calls the Fever games locally, and she and Pat Boyle are excellent. I also like the Dallas broadcast of Ron Thulin, Nancy Lieberman and Fran Harris. People often say leagues are rooting for big market teams to help TV ratings. Does that really affect the leagues much? Are playoff TV contracts dependent on the teams that are playing? — Zachary What leagues and networks root for above all is length in a series. You just saw a real-time example. Game 7 of the NBA Finals averaged 16.6 million viewers. It bailed out a series that was trending brutally low on viewership. Media market size definitely matters, but where a game airs matters more (broadcast versus cable, for example). The broadcast contracts are fixed over years. The teams that play in the postseason has nothing to do with the contracts. Can the new baseball broadcast contract incorporate local TV announcers in the postseason? Use the same video feed, change the ad mix if using a separate channel or streaming service, but give TV viewers the option to hear their local broadcast TV team in the postseason. Gotta be a way to employ available technology and think of this as a value-add rather than a dilution of the potential audience. — Paul S. Not going to happen. The networks with postseason rights are paying a premium for those rights. If you have the local broadcast in play, the business for the national networks is impacted significantly because you dilute the media markets of the teams in the series. Advertisement What will be the state of successful local regional sports networks in five years? Is there any way AM radio can survive? Is basketball headed to be as niche as hockey now? — Chris K. Five years is a lifetime in sports media. Clearly, leagues such as MLB and the NBA would love to centralize the RSNs but I don't see successful regional networks forgoing that business for the better of the league. An easy prediction is teams will continue to develop their direct-to-consumer streaming business. AM radio is obviously challenged, but pay attention to this legislation. The NBA just signed a mega-media rights deal with three major players. It's not a niche sport unless you define niche as 'everything that's not the NFL.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Cavaliers Must Trade Three Stars To Acquire LeBron James; Deal Looks Complicated But Not Impossible
Cavaliers Must Trade Three Stars To Acquire LeBron James; Deal Looks Complicated But Not Impossible originally appeared on Fadeaway World. LeBron James is once again dominating the headlines, as it appears he could potentially leave the Los Angeles Lakers at some point before next year's trade deadline. James' future is up in the air, and NBA analyst Kevin O'Connor thinks the Cleveland Cavaliers should go all-in for him. Advertisement "LeBron James to the Cavaliers would require getting under the second apron, which would mean losing Jarrett Allen, Darius Garland, and a third guy: probably Max Strus. "It's a lot to give up for a player who may not put you over the top and may have only one year left. Then again, Allen has folded in the playoffs and Garland is a tiny guard. Could trading them be a low key salary dump for Cleveland? Then whenever LeBron retires, the front office would have cap flexibility to build next to Donovan Mitchell and Evan Mobley with better-fitting players than Allen and Garland. So in a strange way, adding LeBron could help optimize their short-term title odds while also helping in the longer term." O'Connor acknowledged this would be a complicated deal. At least one more team would have to be involved, along with the Cavaliers and Lakers. The Cavaliers do have an excuse to go all-out. They finished atop the standings in the East with a 64-18 record in the 2024-25 season, but were blown away in five games by the Indiana Pacers in the Conference Semifinals. While injuries played a part in that, doubts remain about whether this group can deliver in the postseason. Advertisement James brings championship pedigree to the Cavaliers, but they would have a very short title window with him. He put up excellent averages of 24.4 points, 7.8 rebounds, 8.2 assists, 1.0 steals, and 0.6 blocks per game in 2024-25, but is a 40-year-old entering his 23rd season. Even if James, who just opted into his $52.6 million player option for 2025-26, does have gas left in the tank to carry on for a while longer, his wife, Savannah, wants him to retire soon. Is it worth it to give up pieces like Darius Garland and Jarrett Allen in this scenario? It's hard to say, but O'Connor is bullish. He isn't the only one who suggested this reunion, either. The Ringer's Bill Simmons proposed a three-team trade that would see the Cavaliers acquire James. The Utah Jazz are the third team here, and Garland is the only big piece the Cavaliers are giving up in this scenario. This would be a safer option than what O'Connor suggested. James finishing his career with his hometown Cavaliers, who selected him with the first pick in the 2003 NBA Draft, would be perfect. He led them to their first and only NBA title in 2016 in historic fashion, and winning another would be incredible. Advertisement The Cavaliers have a great chance of getting to the 2026 NBA Finals even if they stay put, due to all the injuries to their competitors in the East. Jayson Tatum, Tyrese Haliburton, and Damian Lillard are all out with Achilles tears, which means the Boston Celtics, Indiana Pacers, and Milwaukee Bucks aren't going to be threats. The Cavaliers can either back this current core to roll over a weak Eastern Conference, or they could go for broke and acquire a superstar like James. You can see the pros and cons in both scenarios, and it will be interesting to see what direction the Cavaliers go in. Related: Top 5 Landing Spots For LeBron James If He Requests A Trade From The Lakers This story was originally reported by Fadeaway World on Jun 30, 2025, where it first appeared.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
LeBron James Surprisingly Drawing 'Little To No Trade Interest' Around The NBA
LeBron James Surprisingly Drawing 'Little To No Trade Interest' Around The NBA originally appeared on Fadeaway World. Despite being one of the greatest players in basketball history, LeBron James is reportedly generating 'little to no trade interest' around the league, a revelation that has stunned some fans but makes sense when factoring in age, salary, and circumstances. According to ESPN's Bobby Marks, multiple front offices view trading for LeBron as an unrealistic proposition in 2025. Advertisement "You know, to be sensitive to LeBron, who's considered one of the greatest of all time, there isn't, and here's why. He's making fifty-three million dollars. He's in his last year of his contract. He's forty years old." "And I talked to numerous teams yesterday and asked that same question: would you give up, basically, the farm? And basically, you'd have to give up four or five players to go get LeBron James for one year. And the unanimous answer was no, they wouldn't." "Now, the stakes change a lot if LeBron James ever became a free agent and did some type of buyout in Los Angeles. There, you would have twenty-nine teams lined up for him." "But from a trade perspective and here's a hypothetical his former team, the Cleveland Cavaliers, who are in this second apron and have spent a lot of money, they would basically have to trade about six players, Dan, just to go out and get him for one year. And as one team told me, that's not smart business." Advertisement LeBron recently opted into his $52.6 million player option for the 2025–26 season, confirming his return to the Los Angeles Lakers for a record-setting 23rd season. Yet, his agent Rich Paul made waves with a pointed statement that hinted at dissatisfaction: 'LeBron wants to compete for a championship. He knows the Lakers are building for the future... but he values a realistic chance of winning it all.' That cryptic message has fueled speculation that the King might consider forcing a trade if the Lakers can't deliver a contending roster. LeBron just averaged 24.4 points, 8.2 assists, and 7.8 rebounds in his 22nd NBA season. From December 30 onward, he was one of just three players to average at least 25-7-7, the others being Nikola Jokic and Luka Doncic. Another factor is off the court: LeBron's wife, Savannah James, reportedly wants him to retire 'in the next year or so.' That revelation, overheard at a recent dinner in New York, has added another wrinkle to James' future. Still, sources close to the family say LeBron is not viewing this upcoming season as a farewell tour. Advertisement So while the Lakers remain his home for now, the pressure is building. LeBron wants to win. He's watching every move the front office makes. If Los Angeles can't meet his championship standard, the possibility of him leaving or forcing the league to adjust around him remains very real. Related: LeBron James' Friend Hints At King James' Next Team; Rips Lakers Fans For Being Ungrateful This story was originally reported by Fadeaway World on Jun 30, 2025, where it first appeared.
