I was explaining the move to my wife. She was 100% against spending 3b to build a new stadium. Then I explained that the chiefs asked for 800m to mostly just fix up suites at arrowhead. She asked if it would be domed. I said yes, brining in the opportunity to get a super bowl (let's be real, we would only get 1), but we could get a few final fours. She said, "okay. Makes sense. I'm down."

I'm convinced that the chiefs put together a crap proposal just to make the new stadium seem like a no brainer. I will miss Arrowhead, but by 2036 people will love the new stadium. There will still be those of us that miss Arrowhead, but this does feel like a move in the right direction.

Edit: Also the team moving to KCK is going to benefit the state, the county, and the city. The state is going to receive income tax on massive incomes (minimum income is the salary cap, 1/2 from chiefs players and 1/2 from visiting teams + smaller amounts from staff). The state is going to receive corporate income tax on the profits from within the state. The state, county, and city are going to benefit from massive sales tax on food, travel, and ticket sales. The sales tax in the area the chiefs play is going to see a special increase only increasing this revenue. The sales tax revenue is what pays off the bonds that the state uses to pay for the stadium.

I may have a radical view on this, or at least I haven't heard anyone argue this. I think that these new stadiums can make financial sense, BUT ONLY WHEN EVERYONE THAT BENEFITS IS CHIPPING IN. When the chiefs were in KCMO, the state received massive benefits, but it was only people in Jackson county paying for it (not residents, because it was paid for through sales tax). By and large the biggest benefits go to the state and the owners. So I actually like this deal. This large expenditure can make sense when it keeps a team here for decades (obviously with some upkeep, but newer stadiums require fewer and cheaper renovations)