I'm sure they are doing some solid click-volume with these articles. Makes sense for them to run those stories, even if they don't hold any water...
- 2,929
Right off the bat: I Am Not A Lawyer.Suburban Sprawl wrote: ↑Oct 10, 2021Thoughts @gone corporate ?
NFL wants separate trials on liability and damages in Rams relocation case
If there are any lawyers who can properly answer this, please do...
Bifurcation here seems to be as the story says: a party can have their financial information held out of a case wherein punitive damages are in play, usually out of a reasonable fear of "Robin Hood" damages being awarded by the jury.
MO State law allows for bifurcation of certain cases where punitive damages are in play. It allows for this to happen at the request of either party.
Perhaps the Defendants are hoping to get the need for their financial info, as ordered by the judge, retroactively inadmissible?
Then again, there is this part of the statute:
§510.263.2:
Therefore, should the Plaintiffs have any need to point out that the NFL is financially profitable before an Inglewood relocation, then they can likely enter such evidence at trial and negate any bifurcation. I can see the Plaintiffs doing so. An example of this is how the NFL recently signed its new $100 BILLION broadcasting rights contracts, up from $35BB pre-LA, showing motive towards fraud.... Evidence of defendant's financial condition shall not be admissible in the first stage of such trial unless admissible for a proper purpose other than the amount of punitive damages.
Nah, I love it. This shows that the League is recognizing they're in a desperate position and are throwing ass-covering solutions out to see if anything will stick, all the way to busting up their 32 team divisional structure. They never would make any notion of such a thing part of the public conversation, with NBC Sports as their mouthpiece, if they weren't trying to lessen what they apparently believe will be their future pain.dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑Oct 09, 2021Can we stop the silly idea of a new team as a settlement. Missouri, city and county are just suppose to pass on a settlement of billions just so bunch of local billionaires can get an nfl team? Only way a team is involved is if the NFL let’s the RSA auction of the team afterwards and proceeds split along the 3 entities minus 35% to the lawyers
It's now obvious they're sweating bullets and getting desperate, a full 3 months before trial starts. Good.
It's perhaps possible that the 35% contingency fees to the attorneys, as part of any potential award to the Plaintiffs, is so stupidly large that they'll have enough to buy a team for STL with their winnings. I'd take that in place of a City-owned team, which just ain't gonna happen.Laife Fulk wrote: ↑Oct 09, 2021Gah. Who's pushing the new team pipedream now? At least, from what I've read, the new team as a settlement idea only exists in the minds of NFL bloggers and die hard fans. I can't imagine the city, state, or lawyers have any interest in even entertaining it as a real outcome.
5-1 They'd somehow get the Spanos family to sell the Chargers to the lawyers; relocate the team to STL from Inglewood; build them a new stadium; and then swap that team with the Rams divisionally so as not to have an interstate AFC divisional rivalry with the Chiefs; before they expand to 33.
As @MarkHaversham so eloquently brought up: I'll cheer the Saint Louis Settlements; same time, I'd prefer the Saint Louis Judgments.
I'd like to fight for eleven-figures in cash first.
- 991
The whole "team as a settlement" idea also has a lot of holes... even if the NFL were to just give St. Louis a team with no expansion fee AND they chipped in an insane amount towards refurbishing the Dome, who would own it? Not a "do we have anyone wealthy enough to buy a team" question, but "how would the NFL decide which billionaire gets handed a team for free?" Or would the expectation be that some billionaire agrees to buy an NFL team at the price that the Rams were valued at before the move and the NFL gets to select who it is? Would the city, state, and RSA have any say in who that owner would be? The mechanisms of this working out as a viable solution seem suspect at best to me.
- 9,561
As I said above, there is only one solution to that- the RSA/City/County establish guidelines for who can bid, how long the team must stay etc and put it out on the open market and keep the proceeds. Middle eastern royal families are running out of top European soccer teams to buy, maybe they’ll venture into the NFL
- 1,610
That's not true. Just buy a middle-of-the-table Championship team on the cheap and start spending on players to get you promoted to the Premier League, a-la-Leeds (though I don't think the provenance of their money is Middle Eastern royalty)dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑Oct 11, 2021As I said above, there is only one solution to that- the RSA/City/County establish guidelines for who can bid, how long the team must stay etc and put it out on the open market and keep the proceeds. Middle eastern royal families are running out of top European soccer teams to buy, maybe they’ll venture into the NFL
- 2,929
STL Biz Journal: In Rams case, NFL seeks to disqualify St. Louis lawyer long involved in relocation saga
This is a very, very late maneuver by the Defendants. Whatever merit their argument holds, it also seems punitive.
So many of their recent moves are so late in the game and kind of desperate. Like they've just woken up.
This is a very, very late maneuver by the Defendants. Whatever merit their argument holds, it also seems punitive.
So many of their recent moves are so late in the game and kind of desperate. Like they've just woken up.
- 991
To be fair, they usually don't get this far into lawsuits without getting them dismissed or moved back into arbitration. So I'm sure they've come up a few last minute maneuvers in an attempt to delay, derail and just cause general dysfunction.
- 134
Now THAT is a plot twist...the lawyers ending up owning an NFL team out of this settlement. I wouldn't even be mad, just impressed.gone corporate wrote: ↑Oct 11, 2021It's perhaps possible that the 35% contingency fees to the attorneys, as part of any potential award to the Plaintiffs, is so stupidly large that they'll have enough to buy a team for STL with their winnings. I'd take that in place of a City-owned team, which just ain't gonna happen.Laife Fulk wrote: ↑Oct 09, 2021Gah. Who's pushing the new team pipedream now? At least, from what I've read, the new team as a settlement idea only exists in the minds of NFL bloggers and die hard fans. I can't imagine the city, state, or lawyers have any interest in even entertaining it as a real outcome.
5-1 They'd somehow get the Spanos family to sell the Chargers to the lawyers; relocate the team to STL from Inglewood; build them a new stadium; and then swap that team with the Rams divisionally so as not to have an interstate AFC divisional rivalry with the Chiefs; before they expand to 33.
- 144
gone corporate wrote: ↑Oct 11, 2021STL Biz Journal: In Rams case, NFL seeks to disqualify St. Louis lawyer long involved in relocation saga
This is a very, very late maneuver by the Defendants. Whatever merit their argument holds, it also seems punitive.
So many of their recent moves are so late in the game and kind of desperate. Like they've just woken up.
- 6,121
Oh . . . ! I'm in! The St. Louis Judgements has a nice ring to it. You could even have a nice, proper, horsey logo. Or maybe four horsey logos.gone corporate wrote: ↑Oct 11, 2021As @MarkHaversham so eloquently brought up: I'll cheer the Saint Louis Settlements; same time, I'd prefer the Saint Louis Judgments.
I'd like to fight for eleven-figures in cash first.
- 1,868
It's not going to happen, but the ownership should go to the city, or to fans like the Green Bay Packers.Laife Fulk wrote: ↑Oct 11, 2021The whole "team as a settlement" idea also has a lot of holes... even if the NFL were to just give St. Louis a team with no expansion fee AND they chipped in an insane amount towards refurbishing the Dome, who would own it? Not a "do we have anyone wealthy enough to buy a team" question, but "how would the NFL decide which billionaire gets handed a team for free?" Or would the expectation be that some billionaire agrees to buy an NFL team at the price that the Rams were valued at before the move and the NFL gets to select who it is? Would the city, state, and RSA have any say in who that owner would be? The mechanisms of this working out as a viable solution seem suspect at best to me.
- 2,056
I'm not a lawyer nor do I negotiate contracts, but I'm trying to piece together if this expansion team is even realistic. Would love some thoughts on what everyone else would see as a realistic outcome. I still don't think this is a possible outcome, ftr, so I'm mostly doing this for fun. This is GM-Lawsuit mode on Madden.
So, for this to happen. You'd have to have a settlement agreement with the City/County/RSA, New Ownership Group, NFL, and the Lawyers. If I'm seeing this in the right light, the new ownership group still has pay the expansion fee of $1B+ to the NFL, and to keep the Lawyers and City/County/RSA from giving anything, there would really be two parties bending over backwards here, the ownership group and the NFL. Ownership group to be "approved" to have an NFL team in St. Louis and the NFL not to be fleeced of all of their money.
Gives in contract:
New Ownership Group:
- Funding of Team in STL
- Expansion Fee ($1B+) to NFL
- Most city-friendly tax district in US history.
NFL
- Expansion Team to STL
- 100 Year lease agreement
- Super Bowl in 1st year and every 20 years after.
- Build out of New Stadium & HQ to STL ($1B site)
- Cash to Lawyers
- % of expansion fee to City/County/RSA
City/County/RSA
- Nothing
Lawyers
- Nothing
Gets in contract:
NFL:
- Expansion Fee ($1B)
Lawyers:
- % Share of Ownership Group
- Cash to cover lawsuit costs
City/County/RSA
- 100 year lease agreement
- Super Bowl in 1st year and every 20 years after.
- Build out of New Stadium & HQ
- Most city-friendly tax district in US history.
- % of expansion fee to City/County/RSA
New Ownership Group
- Top tier stadium funded by NFL (owned by city)
(this is only for fun)
So, for this to happen. You'd have to have a settlement agreement with the City/County/RSA, New Ownership Group, NFL, and the Lawyers. If I'm seeing this in the right light, the new ownership group still has pay the expansion fee of $1B+ to the NFL, and to keep the Lawyers and City/County/RSA from giving anything, there would really be two parties bending over backwards here, the ownership group and the NFL. Ownership group to be "approved" to have an NFL team in St. Louis and the NFL not to be fleeced of all of their money.
Gives in contract:
New Ownership Group:
- Funding of Team in STL
- Expansion Fee ($1B+) to NFL
- Most city-friendly tax district in US history.
NFL
- Expansion Team to STL
- 100 Year lease agreement
- Super Bowl in 1st year and every 20 years after.
- Build out of New Stadium & HQ to STL ($1B site)
- Cash to Lawyers
- % of expansion fee to City/County/RSA
City/County/RSA
- Nothing
Lawyers
- Nothing
Gets in contract:
NFL:
- Expansion Fee ($1B)
Lawyers:
- % Share of Ownership Group
- Cash to cover lawsuit costs
City/County/RSA
- 100 year lease agreement
- Super Bowl in 1st year and every 20 years after.
- Build out of New Stadium & HQ
- Most city-friendly tax district in US history.
- % of expansion fee to City/County/RSA
New Ownership Group
- Top tier stadium funded by NFL (owned by city)
(this is only for fun)
If St. Louis is victorious in the case, then I propose the ‘St. Louis Winners.’
That’s because we beat all 32 NFL teams on the same day, at the same time. Slams gavel.
That’s because we beat all 32 NFL teams on the same day, at the same time. Slams gavel.
I'd want a timeframe of how soon the expansion team comes. None of this 10-15 year talk: more like 2, 3 and at most 4 years. And if they have to play in the Dome for a season or two, that's fine.pattimagee wrote: ↑Oct 12, 2021I'm not a lawyer nor do I negotiate contracts, but I'm trying to piece together if this expansion team is even realistic. Would love some thoughts on what everyone else would see as a realistic outcome. I still don't think this is a possible outcome, ftr, so I'm mostly doing this for fun. This is GM-Lawsuit mode on Madden.
So, for this to happen. You'd have to have a settlement agreement with the City/County/RSA, New Ownership Group, NFL, and the Lawyers. If I'm seeing this in the right light, the new ownership group still has pay the expansion fee of $1B+ to the NFL, and to keep the Lawyers and City/County/RSA from giving anything, there would really be two parties bending over backwards here, the ownership group and the NFL. Ownership group to be "approved" to have an NFL team in St. Louis and the NFL not to be fleeced of all of their money.
Gives in contract:
New Ownership Group:
- Funding of Team in STL
- Expansion Fee ($1B+) to NFL
- Most city-friendly tax district in US history.
NFL
- Expansion Team to STL
- 100 Year lease agreement
- Super Bowl in 1st year and every 20 years after.
- Build out of New Stadium & HQ to STL ($1B site)
- Cash to Lawyers
- % of expansion fee to City/County/RSA
City/County/RSA
- Nothing
Lawyers
- Nothing
Gets in contract:
NFL:
- Expansion Fee ($1B)
Lawyers:
- % Share of Ownership Group
- Cash to cover lawsuit costs
City/County/RSA
- 100 year lease agreement
- Super Bowl in 1st year and every 20 years after.
- Build out of New Stadium & HQ
- Most city-friendly tax district in US history.
- % of expansion fee to City/County/RSA
New Ownership Group
- Top tier stadium funded by NFL (owned by city)
(this is only for fun)
- 3,430
- 6,121
^Who the heck wants the Kansas City team to play here? I wish them luck, but let them stay in Kansas City unless they wish to face a St. Louis team.
- 3,430
https://www.si.com/nfl/2021/10/13/busin ... ms-lawsuit
Business of Football: The NFL Is Losing Its Lawsuit Against St. Louis, But Has Been in Situations Like This Before
Our resident lawyer explains everything you need to know about the case, plus what comes next and how the league has been in situations like this before.
Business of Football: The NFL Is Losing Its Lawsuit Against St. Louis, But Has Been in Situations Like This Before
Our resident lawyer explains everything you need to know about the case, plus what comes next and how the league has been in situations like this before.