An NFL official said recently that having the Super Bowl in a domed stadium in Manhattan is a “no-brainer.” He’s right: Getting New York taxpayers to subsidize a West Side stadium would be much easier if they would stop using their brains. And now the Jets are hoping citizens won’t notice that the bidding on the MTA’s West Side rail yard air rights demonstrates how badly the team is trying to fleece the city.

The new flurry of activity shows that the $600 million the Jets want from taxpayers would be only part of their subsidy. They’d also be getting potentially hundreds of millions more: the difference between what the Jets want to pay for the air rights and what those rights would fetch on the open market.

The MTA’s auction also shows that the far West Side site might be attractive to other developers whose projects would bring far more benefits to the city than a stadium. The cost of the stadium increases even more when New Yorkers give up those opportunities.

By now, the Jets’ attempts to get their subsidized stadium and block other – potentially better – offers are beginning to give the phrase “fantasy football” new meaning.

Way back at the beginning, the Jets argued that the stadium would bring jobs, economic development, and a net gain to the city’s treasury. Fortunately, savvy New Yorkers know a scam when they see one and didn’t buy those tired lines.

After all, countless studies by independent, disinterested researchers find that stadiums generally do not generate net economic growth, at best only create a relatively small number of low-wage, part-time jobs, and need subsidies as far as the eye can see. Increasingly desperate, the Jets have largely dropped promises of jobs and tax revenues and instead are now dangling the lure of a Super Bowl and the 2012 Olympics. Except for Mayor Bloomberg, the fish still aren’t biting.

So the Jets are also suing Cablevision, which had the audacity to bid several times more than they did for the West Side rail yard air rights. The Jets claim that Cablevision is acting anti-competitively by trashing the Jets’ plan and refusing to air the Jets’ pro-stadium propaganda.

Perhaps. After all, Cablevision isn’t exactly a knight in shining armor. It wants to protect its Madison Square Garden revenues. But the lawsuit obscures the real issue, which is that the bidding shows that the stadium isn’t the only game in town. The far West Side really could see a renaissance, and now it’s clearer than ever that the city doesn’t need the Jets to spark it.

An auction can ensure that a resource goes to whomever values it the most and can also disclose what investors are really willing to pay. By showing that others are willing to pay more than the Jets for this public resource, the MTA’s auction demonstrates that the city can probably do a lot better than the Jets’ plan.

It’s true that Cablevision’s $600 million bid may really be worth only $350 million after taking into account the city’s costs. But it still dwarfs the Jets’ original bid, even though the process was rigged in the team’s favor. To best develop the area, New York City and state would have to change certain zoning rules. So far, for unexplained reasons, the powers that be have agreed to change the relevant rules only for the Jets.

In response to Cablevision’s bid, the Jets increased theirs to more than $720 million. The speed with which the Jets jacked up their bid by seven times shows how valuable the site really is. Who knows how much others might bid if they could compete with the Jets on a level playing field?

If existing zoning regulations are a roadblock, then they should be changed and development rights auctioned off in a clear and open way. If the city wants to ensure certain amenities on the site, like parks or low-income housing, then it can require that the auction winner provide them, and the bids will reflect those costs.

A fair auction would show what everyone in the market believes to be the best ways to develop the far West Side. The Jets could bid in that auction and may or may not win. Despite promises of the Super Bowl and the Olympics, if the Jets get their way, and lawsuits if they don’t, the right answer for the city remains the same. If developing one of the last available spaces in Manhattan is the goal, then a fair auction is the way to go. If building a sports palace with tax dollars and lost opportunities is the goal, then the Jets’ plan can’t be beat.

A no-brainer, indeed.

Mr. Wallsten is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a fellow at the AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies.