This is great news. Especially when considering tweets from Russia are the best source in the world for legit news on what's happening in the U.S.
This is great news. Especially when considering tweets from Russia are the best source in the world for legit news on what's happening in the U.S.
- 2,056
That podcast was pretty sobering. 
*Ending about punitive damages was nicer than some of the meat in the middle.
*Ending about punitive damages was nicer than some of the meat in the middle.
You forgot the part where every boy and girl in St. Louis gets a bajillion kajillion dollars and a lollipop every day for the rest of eternity squared.addxb2 wrote: ↑Sep 15, 2021NFL, Clark, Illinois, and stadium specific taxing district, pay for new stadium with a 100 year lease and commits to three Super Bowls over 20 years.
In all seriousness, there is no universe in which the NFL would ever agree to host the most watched television program of the year roughly once every six years in the middle of the nation's 21st largest market in the middle of winter in the Midwest. The Super Bowls that were hosted in the past 15 years by Indianapolis, Detroit, and Minneapolis? They were all and and done affairs - none of those cities will ever host a SB again in their current stadiums. The NFL likes warm weather cities in the south for the Super Bowl, and has only once in its entire history hosted a Super Bowl in a northern city with an outdoor stadium - Metlife Stadium in 2014. And that was only allowed to happen because the stadium happened to be in the largest media market in the country (NYC metro).
Likely true.dweebe wrote: ↑Sep 16, 2021Those numbers could very well be what the NFL/Rams might offer. The question is does the St. Louis group agree and my guess is they don't.dredger wrote: ↑Sep 16, 2021GC, love the analysis but feel you need to get in the realm of possibility and the fact that going all the way to Jury verdict in hope of of punitive damages in the billions will simply mean litigation for years to come. At this point, their is more and more incentives to come out settlement for all the parties IMO and no one is going hand St Louis region billions because Rams value can somehow be tallied at $10 billion.
So what I'm curious is what people think is the amount of hard cash settlement would parties agree too? straight up number. I'm at $425 to 450 million - it is under $500 million and Lawyers walk away with $150 million from Stan K/NFL (reversed engineered my number). Of course, like all these settlement their will be NO apology and no wrongdoing. Leaving $275 to $300 million for the St. Louis stakeholders
Being in the $400 to $500 million range also keeps NFL Rams and possible future Raider's settlement to around $1 billion total and it doesn't sideline a possible future Bills move. A $500 million also sets a number that NFL can go back to City of Buffalo as a payoff if team moves and or offer same amount for state of the art stadium for Bills to stay up as long as city ponies equivalent or more. I think NFL rather pay for lawyers and spend years in courts if St Louis, or Oakland and maybe even Buffalo start looking for billions.
Here's a better question - at the end of the day, how much money do you think St. Louis will actually get for all of this. Not how much will we theoretically be awarded, how much money will we actually see when this is all said and done and Kroenke et al have actually ponied up the money?
I'm going with something higher than $500M but less than $1B as the actual size of the check we get, before the attorneys get paid. So about $350M-650M is the final take.
I believe the title is technically "team investor-operator".dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑Sep 16, 2021*mls has no team owners, the league owns all the teams and you buy a share into that entity and get a title of “team owner”*
Do players not get paid for practice days? Training camp?gone corporate wrote: ↑Sep 16, 2021I had read elsewhere that the payroll tax measured salaries on a per-game payout, meaning the tax applied to game days played, i.e. that the players effectively "worked" only 8 days per year under the tax.quincunx wrote: ↑Sep 15, 2021That'd be about 10% of annual earnings taxes. I don't think your math checks out.gone corporate wrote: ↑Sep 15, 2021that's estimated average earnings taxes of $18.2MM per season.
StlMag - Earnings Tax, Income Tax, and the Rams
https://www.stlmag.com/news/sports/earn ... -the-rams/Since the team’s practice facility and business operation are based in St. Louis County, players only pay the city earnings tax for the 10 days that they actually play games in the city (two preseason games and eight regular-season games). Visiting teams, which come in for two days at a time instead of just one, actually pay the city for more days worth of wages each year than the Rams.
Let’s say that a random Rams player makes $2 million a year. The 10 days that player works in the city would account for about $77,000 of his salary. (Vollmer says the city calculates this based on a standard 2,080-hour work year.) The city would collect 1 percent of that, a measly $770.
$2,150,000 is the average player salary in 2015
x 53 players on a roster
x 2 to include both home and visitor
x 8 games per year
x 0.01 for the earnings tax
= $18,232,000
If we're including preseason, then switch the 8 to 10 and get $22,790,000.
That all stated, I credit your source as reputable.
Either way, it's tax money the City won't want to give up, and for which in part we are suing.
I don't disagree, but the only possible chance the NFL ever hosts a Super Bowl in a northern city is if the stadium has a roof. KC learned this the hard way when they were promised a Super Bowl at the time the renovations of Truman Sports Complex were initially announced. The NFL retracted the offer once the plan for a rolling roof that could go back and forth between Kauffman Stadium and Arrowhead Stadium was scrapped from the renovation plans.dweebe wrote: ↑Sep 17, 20211) Football should be played on God's green grass and under His blue sky. Not under a roof and on plastic.CG91 wrote: ↑Sep 16, 2021Not exactly related but if St. Louis ever does get an NFL team again, the new stadium needs to have a dome/retractable roof. Not that the Rams would’ve ever agreed to the riverfront stadium anyways, but an open air stadium was not a great idea. A roof allows for year round events, the possibility of Super Bowls, Final Fours, College Football Playoffs, etc. And not to mention the crowd noise is much louder in domes, which was one of the few advantages that the Dome did give the Rams when they were here
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
2) Arrowhead Stadium would like a word with you open open air stadiums and crowd noise.
The only northern city to ever host a Super Bowl in an outdoor stadium was East Rutherford, NJ in 2014. And that's only because Metlife Stadium is located in the largest media market in the entire country.
That's why I think people should cool their jets on getting excited about high 9 or low 10 figure judgments. Would we rather have a jury award us $12.7 billion and never actually see a dime, or take a settlement offer for $800M that actually gets paid?addxb2 wrote: ↑Sep 20, 2021Podcast: Conduct Detrimental
The St. Louis Rams Relocation
https://open.spotify.com/episode/51krjg ... l_branch=1
They suggest this is far from won and that the NFL would likely stand a good chance in appealing after jury determination.
- 443
Finally had a moment to listen to this podcast. I have not read the pleadings in this case or researched the legal standards that the Plaintiffs must meet to prevail in the various counts they allege. So, I'm not going to quibble with any of the legal conclusions that the hosts draw. However, the hosts' statements indicate that they have a bias for the Defendants. The Hosts' chosen point of view was to discuss why the Rams and the NFL should ultimately prevail in the long run. They point to the decision from Raiders case in support, but they don't mention the listeners that the Raiders case has ZERO bearing on the decision to be reached by the Court in StL or any Missouri court to which the case may be appealed.addxb2 wrote: ↑Sep 20, 2021Podcast: Conduct Detrimental
The St. Louis Rams Relocation
https://open.spotify.com/episode/51krjg ... l_branch=1
They suggest this is far from won and that the NFL would likely stand a good chance in appealing after jury determination.
The Hosts obsess over the "home cooking" happening in the StL court, but submit only the NFL's failures, and the opinion of unnamed attorney's who think the Rams should have prevailed on some motions, as evidence of bias. The Hosts coincidentally choose to ignore seal on all court documents that Judge McGraugh (sp?) granted in the Defendant's favor likely because it undermines their home cooking argument. The Hosts are quite clear that they believe the Rams cannot receive due process in an StL court because of the Judges' bias (a pretty serious accusation to levy, frankly. This is St. Louis, home to the 8th circuit Court of Appeals, a tremendous legal history, and the offices of dozens of prestigious, well regarded law firms, yet the hosts act like this is some Hee-Haw court whose officers cannot exercise their duties in accordance with their Oaths) and the bias of the Jury. Yet again, the Hosts fail to point out to the potential loss of due process for the Plaintiffs if the case is moved from the present forum, which is proper for the following reasons: (1) The forum is the situs of the alleged injury; (2) the forum is the situs of much alleged unlawful conduct; (3) 2 of the 3 Plaintiff's are domiciled in the forum; (4) Both of the Defendants were domiciled in the forum at the time of the injury.
Additionally, the Hosts expressed very little sympathy, and showed zero empathy, for the Plaintiffs, which I find particularly disappointing. No matter one's opinion on the proper legal outcome, its clear that a group of billionaires conspired to dick over citizens and tax payers of St. Louis, an already economically imperiled municipality. So to sit there an basically cheer on the NFL in this case is pretty gross.
FWIW. His wife is Russian. He is there visiting her family. He said in an interview he would be back stateside in a couple weeks.OnTheEdge wrote: ↑Sep 20, 2021Untitled.png
This is great news. Especially when considering tweets from Russia are the best source in the world for legit news on what's happening in the U.S.
- 2,929
BellaVilla: Solid write-up there.
Disclaimer: I haven't listened to that podcast. I'm not going to sign up to Spotify just to do so.
Also: IANAL...
You indicated that the podcasters fervently believe the Defendants cannot receive due process because of Judge McGraugh being innately biased towards the Plaintiffs. That makes evident their unfamiliarity with the case, as it has already been reviewed by other courtrooms at both the State and the Federal level, all of which have furthered the Plaintiffs' case's progression. Further, I have a high personal opinion of Judge McGraugh and will personally state that I believe he is handling this case by the letter of the law, not by any personal inclinations. Indeed, as you suggested, the podcasters may be the ones who are displaying a bias towards this case.
As their guest was the head NFL Staff Writer for the Sports Business Journal, I'm doubtful that he'd want to be on a broadcast that would position his professional subject in a potentially negative light. Much like how major NFL media writers didn't want to butt heads with the League over issues of head injury or player contracts. No one in that position can reasonably afford to bite the hand that feeds them.
General statement: If the Plaintiffs win at trial (which is not a foregone conclusion!), it'll be appealed by Defendants immediately. It's quite possible that there could be a post-judgment settlement to prevent this case from rattling around in the appeals cycle for multiple years. If STL would ever get an actual apology from the NFL, it most likely will be as part of this type of settlement.
I'm still thinking that this case won't settle and will go to trial. The magnitude of damages possible, for attorneys suing on a contingency basis, makes this the Plaintiff's Counsel's case of the ages.
Disclaimer: I haven't listened to that podcast. I'm not going to sign up to Spotify just to do so.
Also: IANAL...
You indicated that the podcasters fervently believe the Defendants cannot receive due process because of Judge McGraugh being innately biased towards the Plaintiffs. That makes evident their unfamiliarity with the case, as it has already been reviewed by other courtrooms at both the State and the Federal level, all of which have furthered the Plaintiffs' case's progression. Further, I have a high personal opinion of Judge McGraugh and will personally state that I believe he is handling this case by the letter of the law, not by any personal inclinations. Indeed, as you suggested, the podcasters may be the ones who are displaying a bias towards this case.
As their guest was the head NFL Staff Writer for the Sports Business Journal, I'm doubtful that he'd want to be on a broadcast that would position his professional subject in a potentially negative light. Much like how major NFL media writers didn't want to butt heads with the League over issues of head injury or player contracts. No one in that position can reasonably afford to bite the hand that feeds them.
General statement: If the Plaintiffs win at trial (which is not a foregone conclusion!), it'll be appealed by Defendants immediately. It's quite possible that there could be a post-judgment settlement to prevent this case from rattling around in the appeals cycle for multiple years. If STL would ever get an actual apology from the NFL, it most likely will be as part of this type of settlement.
I'm still thinking that this case won't settle and will go to trial. The magnitude of damages possible, for attorneys suing on a contingency basis, makes this the Plaintiff's Counsel's case of the ages.
- 2,929
Looks like there's going to be a pre-trial hearing this Friday.
Meanwhile, more media is picking up on this case.
Front Office Sports: Rams, NFL Near Potentially Costly Trial
Great article, highly recommend.
Also, an interesting excerpt on a theoretical settlement from a week ago:
Pro Football Talk (NBC Sports): NFL fails to get St. Louis relocation lawsuit dismissed
Meanwhile, more media is picking up on this case.
Front Office Sports: Rams, NFL Near Potentially Costly Trial
Great article, highly recommend.
*Front Office Sports is a NYC-based independent media group that positions itself as "The Business of Sports" and "The first mass-market daily sports newsletter network".Sports attorney Daniel Wallach told Front Office Sports that the judge denying summary judgment will likely serve as the “come-to-Jesus moment” for the NFL, making a settlement with the plaintiffs much more likely.
A $1 billion figure could be a “starting point” for the plaintiffs to settle ahead of the trial, Wallach said...
Wallach warned of major damages if a St. Louis jury finds Kroenke and the NFL liable for breach of contract and unjust enrichment:If the judge allows the jury to consider the valuation increase along with the $550 million relocation fee, punitive damages — which multiply damages as a deterrent – could surpass $10 billion.
- The Rams’ increased in value from $1.45 billion in 2015 to its current valuation of $4.8 billion, according to Forbes.
- The plaintiffs claim the city, county, and state have lost more than $100 million in hotel, property tax, sales tax, and ticket tax revenues since the Rams left town.
Also, an interesting excerpt on a theoretical settlement from a week ago:
Pro Football Talk (NBC Sports): NFL fails to get St. Louis relocation lawsuit dismissed
The trial currently is set to begin in January. If it goes forward as schedule it likely will be happening at the same time the Rams host the Super Bowl in their new stadium.
Although the NFL undoubtedly will try one or more creative strategies for avoiding a public reckoning before a jury of average citizens, it’s looking more and more likely that people like Commissioner Roger Goodell, Rams owner Stan Kroenke, and other key owners and witnesses will be placed on a witness stand and subjected to potentially withering cross-examination regarding alleged (or actual) factual inconsistencies regarding the relocation of the Rams.
The possibility of various rich and powerful people being forced to yield to the power of a judge and/or a jury makes a settlement even more likely. However, because the plaintiffs know this, that could make the price to settle the case ridiculously high.
Either way, the NFL has a huge problem on its hands. That problem ultimately flows back to Kroenke, based on reports that he’s responsible for footing the full financial bill arising from the legal fallout of his move.
- 2,056
Here's the apple podcast link, if you are interested.
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/c ... 1490287845
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/c ... 1490287845
Here's the overcast link, if you want: https://overcast.fm/+V5F9ThYp4gone corporate wrote: ↑Sep 22, 2021Disclaimer: I haven't listened to that podcast. I'm not going to sign up to Spotify just to do so.
- 144
Listening to that Ben Fischer guy is 30 mins of my life I'll never get back, had to turn it off. Some horse sh*t at the most basic levels. The relocation guidelines were created in 1999 (1984 actually). The St Louis lawsuit is no different to the Oakland one that was thrown out (they never had a stadium proposal of any sort at any time and I'd even say Davis negotiated in good faith!). Also the jury and judge will be biased and that's just wrong (oh the poor little NFL - I thought no one cared here anyway?).
Theres people on here who know 10 times as much about this lawsuit than he does.
Theres people on here who know 10 times as much about this lawsuit than he does.
Some good stuff. Rams lawsuit stuff starts at 17:20.
https://news.stlpublicradio.org/show/st ... litigation
https://news.stlpublicradio.org/show/st ... litigation
- 2,929
^^That could be huge, but the fact that it's even a possible action is amazing. Basically, the request is to find the 4 of them guilty before the trial begins, owing itself to them straight-up not handing their financials to the court as they have been ordered to do. The rough idea is that, if you ignore the court that has a charge against you and avoid its orders, then you must not consider the case worth fighting, and therefore only a guilty person would do that. So, the court strikes these 4's depositions and just declares them guilty for their part ahead of trial. Meanwhile, it looks like StanK has submitted his financials to the courts already, is not part of this order, and will still have his day in court in January. Until then, however, it would have these 4 co-Defendants already declared guilty, with any damages to be assessed by the January trial jury (that still hasn't even been convened).
Hell, I'm not sure plaintiffs even have submitted a full Damages request. So far, I see:
Yesterday, I talked about this case with my cousin, who's an attorney. I wanted his thoughts on how viable this nugget of civil procedure really is. His response was that, yes, this is viable, and a summary guilty verdict - the default judgment - is possible upon these 4 co-Defendants ahead of trial. He was just dumbstruck that their attorneys let this situation manifest itself, that he couldn't believe the audacity that they'd ignore a court order. In the end, he thinks that they'll get their financials to the court and satisfy their order to produce them.
We also talked about Judge McGraugh, who my cousin knows and with whom he has worked. He talked about how McGraugh is one of the most qualified and well-rounded attorneys he's ever met. McGraugh was one of the only public defenders my cousin had ever heard of that was qualified to handle death penalty cases. He believes that McGraugh is perhaps one of the most diversely experienced judges on the bench in the entire state.
Hell, I'm not sure plaintiffs even have submitted a full Damages request. So far, I see:
- All the monies spent to keep the team here, including land assembly and new stadium design. Around $17-20MM.
- The G-4 loans to the Rams, Chargers, and Raiders. 3 x $650MM, or $1.95BB.
- The increased private asset valuation of the Rams, LLC. That's around $3BB.
Yesterday, I talked about this case with my cousin, who's an attorney. I wanted his thoughts on how viable this nugget of civil procedure really is. His response was that, yes, this is viable, and a summary guilty verdict - the default judgment - is possible upon these 4 co-Defendants ahead of trial. He was just dumbstruck that their attorneys let this situation manifest itself, that he couldn't believe the audacity that they'd ignore a court order. In the end, he thinks that they'll get their financials to the court and satisfy their order to produce them.
We also talked about Judge McGraugh, who my cousin knows and with whom he has worked. He talked about how McGraugh is one of the most qualified and well-rounded attorneys he's ever met. McGraugh was one of the only public defenders my cousin had ever heard of that was qualified to handle death penalty cases. He believes that McGraugh is perhaps one of the most diversely experienced judges on the bench in the entire state.
Conduct Detrimental: EXCLUSIVE: NFL Files Emergency Writ to Appeals Court to Move Trial Out of St. Louis
The filings are attached in this article.
This legal blog was the cited source for this article:
NBC Sports: NFL files emergency appeal to move Rams relocation lawsuit out of St. Louis
STL Biz Journal: Rams, NFL appeal decision keeping relocation trial in St. Louis
The filings are attached in this article.
This legal blog was the cited source for this article:
NBC Sports: NFL files emergency appeal to move Rams relocation lawsuit out of St. Louis
Also:Frankly, the belated effort to change the venue for the lawsuit seems to be an attack less on the jury pool and more on the judge. With the NFL apparently unwilling to file a motion to disqualify the judge (“when you come at the king, you best not miss”), the next best thing would be to find a different jury pool, one with citizens that would be less inclined to react to the messages, subtle or otherwise, that could emanate from the things the judge says and does in their presence. (And if you don’t think that’s a real concern when trying a case, you’re either not a lawyer — or not a very good one.)
The notion that jurors automatically will have a bias against the NFL grossly overstates the extent to which local citizens care about pro football. Hard as it may be for the average pro football fan to digest this, most don’t care. That’s why most efforts to publicly fund football stadiums hinge on an end run around the ballot box.
In the end, it’s just another effort by the NFL to avoid its reckoning. It also would be naive not to think that the effort is aimed at giving the lawyers a built-in excuse if/when they get their asses kicked in open court.
That’s how it always works. When big-money interests that are used to getting their way without scrutiny or consequence suddenly encounter both, the explanation can’t be that their lawyers weren’t good enough. Instead, the lawyers will cite corruption and/or incompetence by the judge and the jury as the main reason for their failure. What better way to set that up than by whining about corruption and/or incompetence before the trial even starts?
STL Biz Journal: Rams, NFL appeal decision keeping relocation trial in St. Louis
NBC Sports: St. Louis plaintiffs file motion for sanctions against four different owners in Rams relocation litigation
Interesting discussion on the legal strategy behind this, assuming it's a proactive move.
Mike Florio at NBC Sports, who's apparently the biggest national sports writer covering this case, makes his thoughts on that at the end:
Interesting discussion on the legal strategy behind this, assuming it's a proactive move.
Mike Florio at NBC Sports, who's apparently the biggest national sports writer covering this case, makes his thoughts on that at the end:
Whatever the motivation and actual strategy, this case keeps getting bigger and bigger. Making the failure of certain major national media outlets to give it much attention even more glaring.
- 6,121
^^^My friend the former deputy chief council to a former MO AG (who is not presently serving as a seditionist senator) also spoke highly of McGraugh. I was surprised he hadn't heard about the case, but he immediately dug in when he saw it. (He's mostly doing civil rights stuff these days, and he's in a different jurisdiction anyway.) He doesn't know him personally, but apparently respects his opinions and his work. This thing has got to be the most exciting thing out of the NFL in decades.
- 2,056
Does the STLToday have enough clout/bravery to call out the national media outlets who aren't covering this? Would that article make sense to write?
Headline: "Why major outlets refuse to cover St. Louis vs. NFL. Ignorance? Apathy? Collusion? My column."
Headline: "Why major outlets refuse to cover St. Louis vs. NFL. Ignorance? Apathy? Collusion? My column."