Timing is everything. Or not.
so you want to dump more money at this?MarkHaversham wrote:Because we spent a bunch of capital recruiting them to come here in the first place?ynot wrote:At this point, why force someone who wants to leave into staying?
i agree 100% with the Roger Wyoming's post below yours ...
- 1,868
I'm not saying we should want to keep the Rams or the NFL, necessarily. But as far as the question of why we might want to, is because it's a community asset and investment.ynot wrote:so you want to dump more money at this?MarkHaversham wrote:Because we spent a bunch of capital recruiting them to come here in the first place?ynot wrote:At this point, why force someone who wants to leave into staying?
i agree 100% with the Roger Wyoming's post below yours ...
Besides, Stan won't live forever!
I'm not saying we should want to keep the Rams or the NFL, necessarily. But as far as the question of why we might want to, is because it's a community asset and investment.
Besides, Stan won't live forever!
lol, yeah Stan is rather old. i'd love to keep the rams, but i think the relationship between the owner and metro region - an important one - is turning into a messy divorce. it's like we are going from investing to paying alimony. haha.
Besides, Stan won't live forever!
lol, yeah Stan is rather old. i'd love to keep the rams, but i think the relationship between the owner and metro region - an important one - is turning into a messy divorce. it's like we are going from investing to paying alimony. haha.
The idea that St. Louis can outlast bad owners seems silly to me. In 49 years of NFL football we've had Bidwell, Frontierre, and Kroenke (with apologies to Froentierre's heirs who had the team for a brief period after her death).
Frontierre has a good reputation in St. Louis because she brought the team here and won a Super Bowl here, but she's also the person who treated Los Angeles to a lot of bad football and bolted their town when a subpar stadium situation allowed it. Further, she's the person who allowed people like Jay Zygmunt and John Shaw to be around the franchise so often and with so much control that even the good era of Rams football had an expiration date.
If Stan Kroenke stays in St. Louis and passes away, we get his wife and son. I don't trust them.
If Kroenke leaves and the Rams get another owner—be it a franchise swap or a lose and lure—it's going to be someone who either just tried to move their team to LA from their current long-time home market or someone who's leaving a different current home market or both.
The NFL is an extremely successful business, but there aren't a whole lot of owners who play nice. And the ones who do certainly aren't the guys who are going to be moving their team.
Stan Kroenke is trash and he doesn't deserve to move. I don't want to see him "win" this battle. But it's time for St. Louis to let these guys go.
Frontierre has a good reputation in St. Louis because she brought the team here and won a Super Bowl here, but she's also the person who treated Los Angeles to a lot of bad football and bolted their town when a subpar stadium situation allowed it. Further, she's the person who allowed people like Jay Zygmunt and John Shaw to be around the franchise so often and with so much control that even the good era of Rams football had an expiration date.
If Stan Kroenke stays in St. Louis and passes away, we get his wife and son. I don't trust them.
If Kroenke leaves and the Rams get another owner—be it a franchise swap or a lose and lure—it's going to be someone who either just tried to move their team to LA from their current long-time home market or someone who's leaving a different current home market or both.
The NFL is an extremely successful business, but there aren't a whole lot of owners who play nice. And the ones who do certainly aren't the guys who are going to be moving their team.
Stan Kroenke is trash and he doesn't deserve to move. I don't want to see him "win" this battle. But it's time for St. Louis to let these guys go.
- 9,568
anyone else smell that? that's a smell of a lawsuit coming if the Rams are approved to leave. long summer coming up.
Smells like billable hours.dbInSouthCity wrote:anyone else smell that? that's a smell of a lawsuit coming if the Rams are approved to leave. long summer coming up.
- 3,235
I agree with that approach, but where in the doc does it allude to that.dbInSouthCity wrote:anyone else smell that? that's a smell of a lawsuit coming if the Rams are approved to leave. long summer coming up.
- 3,767
I wonder if STL is "promised" a team at some point, as part of this "grand bargain". Maybe they just warn STL reps not to litigate, IF they ever want a team to come back to STL. If the NFL perceives any kind of threat from an STL lawsuit, I'd assume they have a plan to combat it. Their best defense will likely be that the CVC broke the lease and lost arbitration. Also, the NFL guidelines are just that, not meant to be law, set in stone.
That's been making the rounds on social media. Pretty sure about half of my Facebook friends of liked or shared it so far. People are mad as hell at Kroenke.moorlander wrote:This is one of the better articles yet
http://www.turfshowtimes.com/2016/1/7/1 ... relocation
All signs pointing towards the Rams leaving town.
Today, Roger Goodell released a report saying none of the three home markets have put forth sufficient stadium proposals, and that they've all been working for a number of years to find one. Essentially Goodell is saying don't block anyone from moving on those grounds. They're all eligible.
But today's report is clearly targeted at the Rams. We all knew already that Oakland and San Diego didn't have proposals. St. Louis is the one that does. Goodell is clearly trying to influence owners to put that aside and approve Kroenke.
It's still the owners' call. But the league is making their push.
Additionally, Jerry Jones has proposed an alternative plan that would pair the Chargers with the Rams in Inglewood. Before you write that off as being something Spanos won't agree to, think this through.
The league isn't voting on the two stadium proposals in LA. They're voting on each of the three teams INDIVIDUALLY.
If Jones is successful in influencing owners, the Rams could be approved, the Chargers could be approved, and the Raiders could be denied.
They can't make Spanos partner with Kroenke, but at that point Kroenke would have his go ahead to move into his new Inglewood digs. Spanos would then be forced to make the difficult decision of partnering with Kroenke or staying in San Diego.
Today, Roger Goodell released a report saying none of the three home markets have put forth sufficient stadium proposals, and that they've all been working for a number of years to find one. Essentially Goodell is saying don't block anyone from moving on those grounds. They're all eligible.
But today's report is clearly targeted at the Rams. We all knew already that Oakland and San Diego didn't have proposals. St. Louis is the one that does. Goodell is clearly trying to influence owners to put that aside and approve Kroenke.
It's still the owners' call. But the league is making their push.
Additionally, Jerry Jones has proposed an alternative plan that would pair the Chargers with the Rams in Inglewood. Before you write that off as being something Spanos won't agree to, think this through.
The league isn't voting on the two stadium proposals in LA. They're voting on each of the three teams INDIVIDUALLY.
If Jones is successful in influencing owners, the Rams could be approved, the Chargers could be approved, and the Raiders could be denied.
They can't make Spanos partner with Kroenke, but at that point Kroenke would have his go ahead to move into his new Inglewood digs. Spanos would then be forced to make the difficult decision of partnering with Kroenke or staying in San Diego.
- 8,155
^ I generally agree with you but the report also ensures that Kroenke will be free to leave for elsewhere if he isn't chosen for LA.
With the newest article about goodell stating the new stadium is not adequate, it's now completely obvious that it has been the plan from the very beginning that they were going to screw St. Louis. The fact that they coaxed the city along to spend millions of $$$ to make plans to build a stadium that they weren't going to consider. It blows my mind how they can call it inadequate when we made plans for it not being able to negotiate with anyone.
I'm not watching any NFL ever again if they leave. Not spending a dime on anything NFL related ever again.
I'm not watching any NFL ever again if they leave. Not spending a dime on anything NFL related ever again.
I don't think we could have expected anything different out of NFL itself. It has already put it upon the owners to decide which team(s) should be in LA. Why send a report over that would tell the owners that the only choice was Carson City. At the end of they day, believe the owners have a pretty good grasp of he reality of where football stadiums at. In terms of St. Louis, San Diego and Oakland you could fairly state that St. Louis could make it happen, San Diego has the resources to make it happen on a yes vote in June, and Oakland doesn't have a chance. No doubt Inglewood can happen.
Which leaves Carson City and where does the private financing truly stand? Unfortunately for St. Louis, they would probably be in better shape of keeping the Rams if Carson City financing was already a done deal and the owner wasn't so fricking wealthy. Its pathetic on part of the NFL that the Oakland Raiders won't go anywhere by default while another city will lose its franchise after putting together a viable stadium financial plan with public funds to boot.
The one item that rubs the wrong way but I don't think anyone of us will ever know the whole truth. Did stadium task force commission ran with the $300 million stated by the NFL verbally but never actually written in stone (In fairness NFL, I believe the only thing written in stone is their explicit policy of $200 million) or did the NFL purposely gave that number knowing very well they where going to use it against the task force later.
Which leaves Carson City and where does the private financing truly stand? Unfortunately for St. Louis, they would probably be in better shape of keeping the Rams if Carson City financing was already a done deal and the owner wasn't so fricking wealthy. Its pathetic on part of the NFL that the Oakland Raiders won't go anywhere by default while another city will lose its franchise after putting together a viable stadium financial plan with public funds to boot.
The one item that rubs the wrong way but I don't think anyone of us will ever know the whole truth. Did stadium task force commission ran with the $300 million stated by the NFL verbally but never actually written in stone (In fairness NFL, I believe the only thing written in stone is their explicit policy of $200 million) or did the NFL purposely gave that number knowing very well they where going to use it against the task force later.
- 8,155
^ There was never any promise for an extra $100M from the League.... there'd have to be a vote on that. It only came from a part of the cabal that was supporting the Carson alternative over the Inglewood plan.
Also, while I think the NFL is a corrupt collection of repugnant billionaires (save one or two). I have to go back to the fact that the Task Force came up short if you compare it to the new Vikings stadium, which many see as the baseline for such deals.
If the County had participated, the Task Force could have put together a more rock solid proposal (aside from the state legislature issue) that would have at least matched, if not surpassed, what the NFL got from Minnesota when the Vikings threatened to move to LA.
Also, while I think the NFL is a corrupt collection of repugnant billionaires (save one or two). I have to go back to the fact that the Task Force came up short if you compare it to the new Vikings stadium, which many see as the baseline for such deals.
If the County had participated, the Task Force could have put together a more rock solid proposal (aside from the state legislature issue) that would have at least matched, if not surpassed, what the NFL got from Minnesota when the Vikings threatened to move to LA.
- 1,868
Has anyone from the NFL even said the stadium deal is inadequate (and how), or did they just nod along and pretend it never happened?
- 8,155
It looks like there are at least three grounds for Goodell's report that the STL plan was insufficient:
-- questions about the state funding with 3/4 of the legislature on record for being opposed to bond funding w/o a vote
-- the plan calls for $100M in NFL funding in excess of what is currently allowed under G4 program
-- the owner says the plan would provide less fiscal return to him than present
-- questions about the state funding with 3/4 of the legislature on record for being opposed to bond funding w/o a vote
-- the plan calls for $100M in NFL funding in excess of what is currently allowed under G4 program
-- the owner says the plan would provide less fiscal return to him than present
No matter what St. Louis has thrown at him, Kroenke wants to leave.
As stated before, why would St. Louis upgrade a stadium that's barely 20 years old, with debt, to the tune of nearly $800-million bucks?
Kroenke went high-priced during the original negotiations because he knew St. Louis wouldn't go for it. This IDIOT knows St. Louis. He's been developing and buying property around the region for decades.
In my opinion, St. Louis City and the governor did a good job of trying to call 'Stache's bluff. Still, if the package offered to Kroenke by St. Louis City and Missouri had been AIR TIGHT he and his minions would've found a pin to stick a hole in it.
I now believe this is why St. Louis County backed out. County leadership knew the writing was on the wall. Notice how St. Louis County hasn't said a peep since pulling out.
Anyway, now Jerry Jones is even sticking his plastic nose in sh*t. Likely saying to 'Stache, "Look at what I have in Dallas. They should be giving you similar in St. Louis" - even though St. Louis' market nor economy is as large as Dallas'. Word is Jones has been drawing up plans for L.A. for the Chargers and Rams. Trust me, Jerry has been putting sh*t into 'Stache's head.
But Jerry, whose own team sucks even with a "Bells and Whistles" stadium, only wants a piece of L.A. market money in his pocket too. Keep in mind too that 'Stache is going to have to pay the NFL big loot to move. The owners win....even those RELUCANT to see the team leave St. Louis.
As stated in a previous post on this thread, the NFL fraternity is going to back Kroenke at the end of the day. St. Louis football fans need to start mourning now.
Most of the owners are a bunch of billionaire shysters who are only interested in lining their pockets at the expense of taxpayers.
I will be hella-shocked if the decision went any other way because all of them know that what goes around comes around.
Trust me, other regions across the country will face this same dilemma in upcoming years.
As stated before, why would St. Louis upgrade a stadium that's barely 20 years old, with debt, to the tune of nearly $800-million bucks?
Kroenke went high-priced during the original negotiations because he knew St. Louis wouldn't go for it. This IDIOT knows St. Louis. He's been developing and buying property around the region for decades.
In my opinion, St. Louis City and the governor did a good job of trying to call 'Stache's bluff. Still, if the package offered to Kroenke by St. Louis City and Missouri had been AIR TIGHT he and his minions would've found a pin to stick a hole in it.
I now believe this is why St. Louis County backed out. County leadership knew the writing was on the wall. Notice how St. Louis County hasn't said a peep since pulling out.
Anyway, now Jerry Jones is even sticking his plastic nose in sh*t. Likely saying to 'Stache, "Look at what I have in Dallas. They should be giving you similar in St. Louis" - even though St. Louis' market nor economy is as large as Dallas'. Word is Jones has been drawing up plans for L.A. for the Chargers and Rams. Trust me, Jerry has been putting sh*t into 'Stache's head.
But Jerry, whose own team sucks even with a "Bells and Whistles" stadium, only wants a piece of L.A. market money in his pocket too. Keep in mind too that 'Stache is going to have to pay the NFL big loot to move. The owners win....even those RELUCANT to see the team leave St. Louis.
As stated in a previous post on this thread, the NFL fraternity is going to back Kroenke at the end of the day. St. Louis football fans need to start mourning now.
Most of the owners are a bunch of billionaire shysters who are only interested in lining their pockets at the expense of taxpayers.
I will be hella-shocked if the decision went any other way because all of them know that what goes around comes around.
Trust me, other regions across the country will face this same dilemma in upcoming years.
Here's what should happen POST RAMS:
1. Still invest in America's Center and the EJD. Invest millions upgrading it so that it can become a TOP TEN convention/event center.
2. Investing in Plan 2 for the north riverfront. The city should be willing to give millions in tax breaks in order to reclaim the piece of riverfront according to the plan drawn up by Clayco's Forum Studio THEN partner with Clayco to build it out.
3. Revisit tax breaks for Ballpark Village. Back bonds if necessary in order to stimulate this part of downtown further.
4. Bling out Scottrade Center. Don't give away the bank, but make the owner happy. Encourage him to pursue another pro tenant.
5. Make all downtown streets "Smart" including paving and streetscaping.
6. Incentivize tech for the whole city - not just downtown and CORTEX.
7. Build the Olive Streetcar.
8. Incentivize/Push for more downtown market-rate housing.
9. Incentivize/Push for more downtown retail.
10. Incentivize/Push for more downtown jobs.
The sweetest revenge St. Louis could have is to have cranes hovering over downtown when aerial shots of downtown are shown during Cardinals games.
1. Still invest in America's Center and the EJD. Invest millions upgrading it so that it can become a TOP TEN convention/event center.
2. Investing in Plan 2 for the north riverfront. The city should be willing to give millions in tax breaks in order to reclaim the piece of riverfront according to the plan drawn up by Clayco's Forum Studio THEN partner with Clayco to build it out.
3. Revisit tax breaks for Ballpark Village. Back bonds if necessary in order to stimulate this part of downtown further.
4. Bling out Scottrade Center. Don't give away the bank, but make the owner happy. Encourage him to pursue another pro tenant.
5. Make all downtown streets "Smart" including paving and streetscaping.
6. Incentivize tech for the whole city - not just downtown and CORTEX.
7. Build the Olive Streetcar.
8. Incentivize/Push for more downtown market-rate housing.
9. Incentivize/Push for more downtown retail.
10. Incentivize/Push for more downtown jobs.
The sweetest revenge St. Louis could have is to have cranes hovering over downtown when aerial shots of downtown are shown during Cardinals games.
- 1,868
Is there any actual chance of another pro tenant (which I assume means NBA)?arch city wrote:Here's what should happen POST RAMS:
4. Bling out Scottrade Center. Don't give away the bank, but make the owner happy. Encourage him to pursue another pro tenant.
There is less than a 5% chance of an NBA tenant, I think. That's probably an accurate number, but to illustrate how little shot we have, we should probably FEEL like there is less than a 1% chance. We're just not on the NBA's radar. There are many cities ahead of us. And their currently isn't a team that has any real probability of moving nor have I heard much NBA expansion chatter.MarkHaversham wrote:Is there any actual chance of another pro tenant (which I assume means NBA)?arch city wrote:Here's what should happen POST RAMS:
4. Bling out Scottrade Center. Don't give away the bank, but make the owner happy. Encourage him to pursue another pro tenant.
Now, there are other pro options, but they'd be minor pro.
Perhaps St. Louis could get an NBA D-League team (though I don't know how well we'd support one). Or perhaps we could lure the current incarnation of the St. Louis Ambush into the big city from St. Charles. (I'm not looking to put the Family Arena out of business, though.)
So realistically, I'm not sure what the options are for another pro team in the Scottrade Center. But upgrades could certainly help draw one off or annual events on a more frequent basis.
I really don't understand the negativism as it relates to St. Louis having an NBA team. When will some St. Louisans ever learn to be confident?
If the Rams leave, MILLIONS will be on the table to support an NBA team. Millions in corporate support could easily attract the NBA. And If Denver can support four pro teams certainly St. Louis can.
While Denver's economy and population tends to grow faster, it still has fewer F1000 companies. AND with the NFL leaving STL there's just that much more money to support a REPLACEMENT pro sports team.
The NBA would do well in St. Louis.
A blinged out upgraded arena - still the largest in Missouri - I think - would be very attractive to an NBA owner.
If the Rams leave, MILLIONS will be on the table to support an NBA team. Millions in corporate support could easily attract the NBA. And If Denver can support four pro teams certainly St. Louis can.
While Denver's economy and population tends to grow faster, it still has fewer F1000 companies. AND with the NFL leaving STL there's just that much more money to support a REPLACEMENT pro sports team.
The NBA would do well in St. Louis.
A blinged out upgraded arena - still the largest in Missouri - I think - would be very attractive to an NBA owner.