urbanSTL

DogtownBnR wrote:^ I would love for MLS to be part of this. I wonder if it is possible to design an MLS friendly NFL stadium. I would hope that MLS can work here, in an NFL stadium, competing with the Cardinals. The MLS season runs from March to October, so I'm not sure how a mediocre to bad MLS team would do here. (I'm making the assumption that our MLS will have some bad seasons). Competing with the Cards will be tough, especially in a huge NFL stadium. I'd still love to see an MLS specific venue. However, if it takes playing in an NFL venue, to get a team here, I welcome that. A St. Louis Gunners (Arsenal affiliated) team would be the best option, assuming Stan stays here. I am not sure how MLS would feel about that. I would love to see an MLS specific venue some day, on the south riverfront.

I think support of FCSTL will be important in showing Garber we in STL are for real, as an MLS city. I think MLS wants to be here, but it has to be under the right circumstances.

Atlanta has a nice solution in their new stadium - cover the upper bowl with large drop down panels -

http://www.sbisoccer.com/2014/11/releas ... ation.html

Minneapolis is pursuing a similar tactic

Arsenal would be a great partner - but given their global presence I would not be surprised if Stan wanted a more prolific US base other than St. Louis - Of course LA -2 is already spoken for with a clown car full of owners - so that ship has sailed

Atlanta stadium is also $400M over budget.

dbInSouthCity wrote:Atlanta stadium is also $400M over budget.

I posted that back a few pages where the NFL bent the debt ratio rules so Arthur Blank could borrow more money for the new place so he could make his version of Jerry's World/AT&T Stadium. At least Blank is accepting the cost over-runs and not demanding public money.

I didn't get the fact the 49ers decided to build in Santa Clara 40 miles out.

Oh, that's because rambling in either direction gets him clicks or views. That dude blows.

DogtownBnR wrote:^ I would love for MLS to be part of this. I wonder if it is possible to design an MLS friendly NFL stadium.

Look no further than CenturyLink Field in Seattle, which hosts both the Seahawks (NFL) and Sounders (MLS). The venue is an open-air stadium and it is widely considered to be the gold standard in terms of gameday atmosphere and experience for BOTH teams.

And its construction costs are only $564 million in 2014 dollars.

In my dream land they devise an alternate uniform with an STL Flag inspired helmet like one of Baltimore's logos.

Awesome idea

ttricamo wrote:

dbInSouthCity wrote:Packers finances are public because the way their ownership is structured)

And to put a bow on this comment: The way there ownership is structured solidifies their fan allegiance, ensures their continued existence in Green Bay, and builds consensus between their majority ownership and the fan base (which only bolsters the first two points even more).

It's actually very interesting how their funding/ownership is structured and could possibly be a model for us. Im happy to put my money towards the Rams. I'd be even happier to do that if I was made to believe I have "ownership" in the franchise.

The pack is a storied franchise in a city of ~100k, the smallest NFL media market. That fact doesn't get much press. Again, extremely fascinating ownership model.

FYI, this isn't allowed by the NFL. The Packers are grandfathered in.

The NFL does not allow teams to be owned by groups. It requires a face, a managing partner. It prefers they be majority owner, although this is not ALWAYS the case such as with Oakland.

http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/blog ... 1419888194

Good article from the Biz Journal....

^ Thanks for the link, agree. My favorite comment is about LA being more valuable in the last couple decades without a team then with a team. Believe their is a lot of truth to it. That of course will all change if a stadium deal is not made by Raiders, Chargers and or the Rams.

On a side note, did a guided tour of 49er's new stadium Friday. Stadium new and shiny of course and the tour spent a lot of time going to and from the exclusive/high price box seats and facilities (upper press box floor was impressive, visitor locker room so so and cheerleaders now have their own locker room). I doubt any of us in the tours had the bucks to be 49ers season ticket holders any time soon. But as an open air stadium it was also hard to see where they spent all the money. It was also odd being on the roof of the box seats (event space for rent with private viewing area and green roof) and seeing planes taking off from San Jose airport. The best part of the tour was the 49er's in house museum. It was a nice touch with a lot of history of the franchise that finished with a viewing of the five super bow trophies. The worst part of the tour, 49er's plush locker & weight rooms off limits no matter what time of year.

dredger wrote:^ Thanks for the link, agree. My favorite comment is about LA being more valuable in the last couple decades without a team then with a team. Believe their is a lot of truth to it. That of course will all change if a stadium deal is not made by Raiders, Chargers and or the Rams.

On a side note, did a guided tour of 49er's new stadium Friday. Stadium new and shiny of course and the tour spent a lot of time going to and from the exclusive/high price box seats and facilities (upper press box floor was impressive, visitor locker room so so and cheerleaders now have their own locker room). I doubt any of us in the tours had the bucks to be 49ers season ticket holders any time soon. But as an open air stadium it was also hard to see where they spent all the money. It was also odd being on the roof of the box seats (event space for rent with private viewing area and green roof) and seeing planes taking off from San Jose airport. The best part of the tour was the 49er's in house museum. It was a nice touch with a lot of history of the franchise that finished with a viewing of the five super bow trophies. The worst part of the tour, 49er's plush locker & weight rooms off limits no matter what time of year.

A friend went to Sunday's season ending 49ers game. He echoed your sentiments about it being an okay place and wondered if 90% of the stadium's cost is over on the luxury box side. While lightyears better than Candlestick, where is all the "pow!" besides WiFi that works was another statement.

dweebe wrote:Another update that sounds fairly negative.

http://www.stlmag.com/news/state-money- ... of-downto/

I think these methods sound negative or shady or whatever, but in terms of the Rams staying in St. Louis, I think it's a positive if your an "ends justify the means" type of person.

I'm not necessarily that type of person, but if the public funding is limited to about 1/3, then I sort of am. Because that's a reasonable amount.

I think the dome could do a lot more to address the so-called "dreary" dim atmosphere. Stadiums with roofs that open only open them about 1/3 of the time. The rest of the time they are closed, but they have sun light coming in through translucent panels. Rather than cutting holes and putting in translucent panels, the dome could simulate the same effect by putting bright daylight colored lighting behind translucent panels in the ceiling to simulate exactly what Arizona and Dallas have 2/3 of the time.

The SF folks said their new stadium isn't loud enough. The dome doesn't have that problem when the team is average or better. Other than more big flat parking lots for tailgating, and fast wifi, what exactly does the new SF stadium offer the fans for that kind of money, (not counting a winning team), that we don't have in the dome? Wind in the face, sunlight, F-18 flyovers?

When you build a new outdoor stadium, the filthy rich in the luxury sky boxes will still be indoors. But in SF, they will get the pleasure of looking out onto the lowly upper middle class freezing or frying or getting drenched during the football game.

I don't think the stlmag piece is negative. They were on the "Rams are gone in 2015" for a long time. This piece seems to be accepting the fact that there is a way to pull off a new stadium without new taxes or vote of people

Sunday marks the 60 days given by the Governor. Hopefully we'll get an official announcement soon.

Number of years since Cleveland has won a championship: 50. (Source: WSJ)

I don't get the idea that keeping this team be predicated upon their win/loss record. I want an NFL team! I want St Louis to be an NFL city! Their record is fourth or maybe fifth in line terms of why it's important to have an NFL city here.