The Rams shouldn't have to set a foundation. There's a team. That's the foundation. No matter what Bernie, Randy, or any of the obviously sharp people on this great forum say, having a team is a privilege that deserves to be treated as such and we can't take solace in that "other cities do it too" because our attendance is worse than many teams with worse records. When we (and other cities like Charlotte, Jacksonville, Cleveland) were starving for NFL in the late 80s and early 90s we weren't asking for a team who made the playoffs, was consistently over .500, or properly built fanbases. We just wanted a team. We should act like we still do. STL is right now failing to capitalize on having a team.
At end of day, filling stadiums or not, the NFL fortunes have been tied to how effectively they have leveraged and created a very very profitable TV Market. Another way to put it, does it really even make sense for a NFL franchise in the small or mid size markets to have a stadium that seats more then 55,000 to 60,000?
- 3,433
Fun fact: The Walton family of Walmart own more wealth than the bottom 40 percent of America.
From Politifact:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter ... h-bottom-/
The statistic correctly compares the combined net worth of the bottom 41.5 percent of American families with the six Walton family members.
No. 9: Jim Walton, $23.7 billion
No. 10: Alice Walton, $23.3 billion
No. 11: S. Robson Walton, oldest son of Sam Walton, $23.1 billion
No. 103: Ann Walton Kroenke, $3.9 billion
No. 139: Nancy Walton Laurie, $3.4 billion
That’s a grand total of $102.7 billion for the whole family.
Ann Walton Kroenke is the wife of Rams owner Stan Kroenke.
From Politifact:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter ... h-bottom-/
The statistic correctly compares the combined net worth of the bottom 41.5 percent of American families with the six Walton family members.
No. 9: Jim Walton, $23.7 billion
No. 10: Alice Walton, $23.3 billion
No. 11: S. Robson Walton, oldest son of Sam Walton, $23.1 billion
No. 103: Ann Walton Kroenke, $3.9 billion
No. 139: Nancy Walton Laurie, $3.4 billion
That’s a grand total of $102.7 billion for the whole family.
Ann Walton Kroenke is the wife of Rams owner Stan Kroenke.
- 1,868
blzhrpmd2 wrote:The Rams shouldn't have to set a foundation. There's a team. That's the foundation. No matter what Bernie, Randy, or any of the obviously sharp people on this great forum say, having a team is a privilege that deserves to be treated as such and we can't take solace in that "other cities do it too" because our attendance is worse than many teams with worse records. When we (and other cities like Charlotte, Jacksonville, Cleveland) were starving for NFL in the late 80s and early 90s we weren't asking for a team who made the playoffs, was consistently over .500, or properly built fanbases. We just wanted a team. We should act like we still do. STL is right now failing to capitalize on having a team.
The Rams are a bunch of millionaires owned by billionaires. I don't feel any civic obligation whatsoever to give them more money. I'll attend games if it sounds like fun, and I'll be polite if I pass them on the street.
And that's what I would expect from a guy that's not excited about the Blues, either. This disturbing "take 'em or leave 'em" attitude is not in accordance with a "great sports town's" civic behavior to get them here or when they came. And once again, if this is who we are as a fan base right now, then we are deserving of our current reputation of truly supporting about 1 1/2 pro franchises. These patterns are how we'll be remembered if we lose another team (I know, evidence pointing to the contrary but national media outlets love to spin it the other way) in a generation. As other cities that we argue we are on par with pass us up in examples of passion and energy, I'm again surprised at our general complacency with this issue.
- 1,868
There are plenty of ways to exhibit civic passion and energy besides shoving money at out-of-town billionaires. If you're an NFL fan then you should support the team, but I don't think disinterested local residents have any civic obligation to drag themselves to a tax-exempt gridiron snorefest just so rich people will like us. That's time and money that could be better spent any number of ways.
This isn't a public park or a Metrolink line or something that will actually contribute to the local community. This isn't some startup that needs our support. It's a group of some of the wealthiest people in the world. If they need our help, it's because they suck at their jobs, and we don't need them.
This isn't a public park or a Metrolink line or something that will actually contribute to the local community. This isn't some startup that needs our support. It's a group of some of the wealthiest people in the world. If they need our help, it's because they suck at their jobs, and we don't need them.
I understand not wanting to help the rich become richer, but I'd argue that having NFL can and does contribute to the community. Few media other than pro sports offer the type of broad advertising potential for a city. We write and write and write about attracting young professionals to our city, yet fail to capitalize on optimizing our appearance to NFL fans of which this young demographic is a monstrous component. I realize that gauging a city's potential based off its fans' behavior is probably irrational, however, I'm sure our current behavior is detrimental to a young person's image of STL as a diverse sports town. I wish all those people we want to have a good opinion of STL perused this website daily to see all the positive things in pipeline, but unfortunately, outlets like ESPN/NBC/CBS/FOX get to voice the loudest messages. Fans get to influence that message and I'd say we are falling short in a time when it's most important.
Now, to change gears. Just because I don't want fans to bail when the team falters, I'll never defend not calling out bad play. I continue to be disturbed by the inconsistency of this bunch.
Now, to change gears. Just because I don't want fans to bail when the team falters, I'll never defend not calling out bad play. I continue to be disturbed by the inconsistency of this bunch.
More than anything, I just like for there to be stuff to do in St. Louis, and to feel like I live in a city that exists on the national stage.
This conversation has been done-to-death by now, but we don't have mountains/ocean/climate that places like Los Angeles, Portland and Austin do to attract attention, advertise and grow. Don't know about you guys but in my experience it seems 90% of the time hearing about places like like Cleveland, Indianapolis or Pittsburgh it's in the context of their sports teams and/or venues. Without those teams those places might as well not even exist on any national stage.
Our region told an NFL franchise to go F itself once before already. How many years (months? days? seconds?) after that did it take for Greater St. Louis to pine for representation in the NFL again? I hope we don't keep repeating these mistakes.
This conversation has been done-to-death by now, but we don't have mountains/ocean/climate that places like Los Angeles, Portland and Austin do to attract attention, advertise and grow. Don't know about you guys but in my experience it seems 90% of the time hearing about places like like Cleveland, Indianapolis or Pittsburgh it's in the context of their sports teams and/or venues. Without those teams those places might as well not even exist on any national stage.
Our region told an NFL franchise to go F itself once before already. How many years (months? days? seconds?) after that did it take for Greater St. Louis to pine for representation in the NFL again? I hope we don't keep repeating these mistakes.
No it doesn't and most teams are going smaller. (Like Lucas Oil in Indianapolis.) But the exception is Green Bay as Lambeau is losing it's charm as they keep tacking on more and more seating.dredger wrote:At end of day, filling stadiums or not, the NFL fortunes have been tied to how effectively they have leveraged and created a very very profitable TV Market. Another way to put it, does it really even make sense for a NFL franchise in the small or mid size markets to have a stadium that seats more then 55,000 to 60,000?
BTW: did anyone see the Chiefs/Redskins game at FedEx field yesterday? The place might have been 1/3rd full.
The NFL has quickly become wise to this conundrum, and the way they've managed to work around it is by promising cities that build new stadiums the ability to host a Super Bowl, as we've seen in Indianapolis, Detroit, etc..... as long as they build a stadium with 70k seats or more. Lucas Oil's capacity on regular Sundays is 62k, but it's expandable to 70k.dweebe wrote:No it doesn't and most teams are going smaller. (Like Lucas Oil in Indianapolis.) But the exception is Green Bay as Lambeau is losing it's charm as they keep tacking on more and more seating.dredger wrote:At end of day, filling stadiums or not, the NFL fortunes have been tied to how effectively they have leveraged and created a very very profitable TV Market. Another way to put it, does it really even make sense for a NFL franchise in the small or mid size markets to have a stadium that seats more then 55,000 to 60,000?
BTW: did anyone see the Chiefs/Redskins game at FedEx field yesterday? The place might have been 1/3rd full.
Other than hosting a Super Bowl, the answer is obviously no, it doesn't make sense.
- 2,929
^Yeah, DC's awful. And when a team's awful, the fans don't come along, let alone stay when it's rough. Fair to say that, although DC is much more full of transplanted NFL fans from all over the country than STL is, they have a much more heralded history and series of accomplishments, as well as RGIII having the great Adidas sponsorship monies while Bradford has, what, Charter Uverse? But if you can't stop KC's special teams from running back those punts for 6 in the second quarter, the fans are gone.
I was in DC a couple weeks ago visiting friends (Bears, Packers, & Bengals fans). They told me DC is already planning to replace FedEx Field with a possibly smaller stadium with more luxury boxes, closer to the Capitol. For the record, FedEx Field is considerably newer than the Edward Jones Dome.
Focus: We all know the Jones Dome would be full of fans wearing Blue & Gold if the Rams were playing like the Chiefs. It's not that STL is preternaturally adverse to cheer for sports teams that are not the Baseball Cardinals; it's that the Rams have been one of the worst teams for the last twelve years, and I mean one of the worst teams ever in NFL history. It's really remarkable both for how bad they've been and for how much they continue to be a going concern. Seriously, they wouldn't have made it this far, this long, doing this badly in many other cities. The remarkable thing is just that they've wallowed in the mire this long, all the while still playing in an outdated crapbox of a stadium. Now that we have the new ownership, their concerns really are to make it a better team, getting Fisher in after Spags' and Linehan's terms at the helm.
If DC fans don't support the Redskins with the same passion that we have for the Rams today, then we're doing relatively fine. The team will turn around, but Rome wasn't built in a day, y'all.
Silver lining: The worse DC does this season, the higher we get in their first round pick of the next draft. Good times.
I was in DC a couple weeks ago visiting friends (Bears, Packers, & Bengals fans). They told me DC is already planning to replace FedEx Field with a possibly smaller stadium with more luxury boxes, closer to the Capitol. For the record, FedEx Field is considerably newer than the Edward Jones Dome.
Focus: We all know the Jones Dome would be full of fans wearing Blue & Gold if the Rams were playing like the Chiefs. It's not that STL is preternaturally adverse to cheer for sports teams that are not the Baseball Cardinals; it's that the Rams have been one of the worst teams for the last twelve years, and I mean one of the worst teams ever in NFL history. It's really remarkable both for how bad they've been and for how much they continue to be a going concern. Seriously, they wouldn't have made it this far, this long, doing this badly in many other cities. The remarkable thing is just that they've wallowed in the mire this long, all the while still playing in an outdated crapbox of a stadium. Now that we have the new ownership, their concerns really are to make it a better team, getting Fisher in after Spags' and Linehan's terms at the helm.
If DC fans don't support the Redskins with the same passion that we have for the Rams today, then we're doing relatively fine. The team will turn around, but Rome wasn't built in a day, y'all.
Silver lining: The worse DC does this season, the higher we get in their first round pick of the next draft. Good times.
- 8,155
If you're saying that the only real benefits for having an NFL team are psychic, then I agree. It is questionable to start with how much an NFL franchise adds to a regional economy and giving away heavy tax subsidies easily can undermine the marginal benefits they may afford. Further, such subsidies may make it harder to afford sounder community investments and huge downtown stadiums can really mess up the grid if site planning isn't careful. If a billionaire owner asks for modest incentives that's fine to consider, but let's not get carried away with what an an NFL team provides. If we want to learn anything from the Saint Louis Cardinals/Rams issue is that we need to be very smart about incentives and understand that even if we win the Super Bowl we'll still lose population unless we concentrate on substantive improvements to our city.rawest1 wrote: This conversation has been done-to-death by now, but we don't have mountains/ocean/climate that places like Los Angeles, Portland and Austin do to attract attention, advertise and grow. Don't know about you guys but in my experience it seems 90% of the time hearing about places like like Cleveland, Indianapolis or Pittsburgh it's in the context of their sports teams and/or venues. Without those teams those places might as well not even exist on any national stage.
Our region told an NFL franchise to go F itself once before already. How many years (months? days? seconds?) after that did it take for Greater St. Louis to pine for representation in the NFL again? I hope we don't keep repeating these mistakes.
There's no hidden or "between-the-lines" meaning to my post. I meant precisely that which I wrote.roger wyoming II wrote: If you're saying that the only real benefits for having an NFL team are psychic, then I agree.
- 3,433
- 8,912
I'm glad our forefathers gave Bill Bidwill a big F U. I've never heard a kind word said about the man, ever.rawest1 wrote:
Our region told an NFL franchise to go F itself once before already. How many years (months? days? seconds?) after that did it take for Greater St. Louis to pine for representation in the NFL again? I hope we don't keep repeating these mistakes.
- 43
I have not seen anything for a while about the rams stadium/relocation plan. Is it still possible they will leave the city?
At present, if that occurs, it seems their most likely landing spot would be the County. But as of now there are no indications that they'll be moving from the dome anytime within the next few years.siu850956106 wrote:I have not seen anything for a while about the rams stadium/relocation plan. Is it still possible they will leave the city?
- 8,912
Based on what?rawest1 wrote:siu850956106 wrote: At present, if that occurs, it seems their most likely landing spot would be the County.
There isn't anywhere else for them to feasibly go right now.moorlander wrote:Based on what?rawest1 wrote:siu850956106 wrote: At present, if that occurs, it seems their most likely landing spot would be the County.
That's not what trusted sports reporters are saying. They have stated that the area directly north and east of the existing stadium is viable and the leading candidate.rawest1 wrote:There isn't anywhere else for them to feasibly go right now.
And nothing I said contradicts that.innov8ion wrote:That's not what trusted sports reporters are saying. They have stated that the area directly north and east of the existing stadium is viable and the leading candidate.rawest1 wrote:There isn't anywhere else for them to feasibly go right now.
The question was "Is it still possible they will leave the city?" and my response was "IF THAT HAPPENS [emphasis added], it seems their most likely landing spot would be in the County."
I'm not sure if I understand where you're going with this beyond there are no options. If the Rams are staying in the St. Louis area the only real options are:rawest1 wrote:And nothing I said contradicts that.innov8ion wrote:That's not what trusted sports reporters are saying. They have stated that the area directly north and east of the existing stadium is viable and the leading candidate.rawest1 wrote:There isn't anywhere else for them to feasibly go right now.
The question was "Is it still possible they will leave the city?" and my response was "IF THAT HAPPENS [emphasis added], it seems their most likely landing spot would be in the County."
-staying in the city (North Riverfront probably)
-going to the county (Fenton or Earth City)
The only other looong shot possibilities are:
-St. Charles county (nobody out there has pushed for it)
-Illinois (never happening with their budget issues and "nothing exists south of Springfield" attitude)
I see people misunderstanding each other and I hate that, haha.
The question was is there a chance the Rams will leave the city still. Whether the poster meant city limits or the greater STL region, I'm not sure, but the response given was under the assumption the question was about the Rams leaving the STL city limits.
And the response was accurate. If the Rams go outside the city, it's still most likely they stay in the greater STL region and play in the county.
I think most likely, though, is that the Rams stay in the dome a while longer and probably get a new stadium somewhere not far from the current one eventually.
The question was is there a chance the Rams will leave the city still. Whether the poster meant city limits or the greater STL region, I'm not sure, but the response given was under the assumption the question was about the Rams leaving the STL city limits.
And the response was accurate. If the Rams go outside the city, it's still most likely they stay in the greater STL region and play in the county.
I think most likely, though, is that the Rams stay in the dome a while longer and probably get a new stadium somewhere not far from the current one eventually.