I just don't see the need nor funding for a new stadium in the next xx yrs. I'm all-in that they retrofit the new dome.
- 11K
^ A retrofit to Kroenke's plans could be $700M. Surely a $900M stadium with the additional money coming from the NFL/Kroenke is at least a possibility.
- 8,912
It's a negotiation so Of course he's starting out at $700m. I could be totally wrong I just see it going in this direction.
- 2,929
Quick note on my East Side takedown: It's not that I don't think that a new, open air stadium on the East STL riverfront wouldn't be incredible. In fact, I have thought for a long time about a semicircular stadium on the site, facing into the Gateway to the West, and creating the single greatest venue view for any sports stadium in the US.
It's just that I don't think there's a snowflake's chance in hell of it being feasible.
Right now, my concerns are with the Rams staying in STL Metro. And I also think they'll stay in the Jones Dome for some time. Going forward, I think that'll depend on what funding looks like and how Stan can make the most off his investment (parking, retail, etc.).
Side note: I've been to Gateway and loved the races, never thought I'd have so much fun watching left turns for 2 hours...
It's just that I don't think there's a snowflake's chance in hell of it being feasible.
Right now, my concerns are with the Rams staying in STL Metro. And I also think they'll stay in the Jones Dome for some time. Going forward, I think that'll depend on what funding looks like and how Stan can make the most off his investment (parking, retail, etc.).
Side note: I've been to Gateway and loved the races, never thought I'd have so much fun watching left turns for 2 hours...
With respect, I do think you're totally wrong. From listening to the tenor of Kevin Demoff's most recent remarks, he makes this ongoing arbitration process sound almost like some unfortunate formality that must be cleared before "the real fun begins" (his words, not mine). His remarks also hint at a process that is both ongoing and has an end date relatively far in the future (more than once he's pointed out that these processes, as they did in Minnesota and Indianapolis, among other places, tend to take the better part of ten years), so those demanding some sort of ironclad commitment from the team's owner in the interim should probably not hold their breath. But, of course, from Stan's remarks a couple years back, plus Kevin Demoff's own remarks all along, as well as NFL commissioner Roger Goodell's, Bernie Miklasz's, Bryan Burwell's, and (most recently, now) Jim Thomas's, it seems that all signs are pointing to the Rams remaining here for the long haul.moorlander wrote:It's a negotiation so Of course he's starting out at $700m. I could be totally wrong I just see it going in this direction.
- 3,433
Thinking outside the box here: What about closing the bridge to through traffic on Sundays and turn *it* into tailgate central? I'd bet there'd be room to park cars perpendicular to the curb in what are typically the eastbound lanes, and then use the two westbound lanes for two way traffic. How awesome would it be to hang out on the bridge, eating, drinking, and checking out 5-star views of the city before a game? And selling parking spots could be a source of revenue for Metro (they own the bridge, right?) and/or the city?roger wyoming II wrote:On game days Eads Bridge could be turned into Rams Bridge and opened to pedestrians with a festive atmosphere.
If Kroenke wants to stay in the city (and early indications are that he does), and if the City wants the Rams to stay, why not be creative in finding unique spots for NFL fans to tailgate? IMO that could be a selling point - in what other city could you tailgate in such an awesome spot? It'd be a draw.
-RBB
^Better staff somebody full-time to catch the footballs that go flying off the Bridge and into the river...
- 3,433
Looking at Google maps, how about that large parcel on the river just North of Eads Bridge on Google Maps labelled "Bloody Island"? (Interesting writeup about Bloody Island in Wikipedia by the way. Several duels conducted there.)
I could see a new stadium there angled such that the South end would point toward Eads Bridge and the Arch for a nice view.
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=bloody+i ... CAsQ_AUoAA
I could see a new stadium there angled such that the South end would point toward Eads Bridge and the Arch for a nice view.
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=bloody+i ... CAsQ_AUoAA
Some pretty solid background of the mystery that is "Silent" Stan Kroenke as it relates to his often-hidden intentions with the Rams:
http://101sports.com/category/misc-blog ... Keep-Rams/
http://101sports.com/category/misc-blog ... Keep-Rams/
Excellent article.rawest1 wrote:Some pretty solid background of the mystery that is "Silent" Stan Kroenke as it relates to his often-hidden intentions with the Rams:
http://101sports.com/category/misc-blog ... Keep-Rams/
Agreed; I'm excited to read the rest of this series (it's apparently set to be a 4-parter).38N 90W wrote:Excellent article.rawest1 wrote:Some pretty solid background of the mystery that is "Silent" Stan Kroenke as it relates to his often-hidden intentions with the Rams:
http://101sports.com/category/misc-blog ... Keep-Rams/
If you're anything like me and have been obsessing over the Rams and their future here for the past 2-3 years, then there isn't really anything new here. That said, I haven't seen a single article that cogently synthesizes all of the past data together through the thesis of Stan and the Rams and St. Louis the way this one does.
I'm glad this information & line of reasoning is becoming more mainstream and reaching a wider audience. I don't expect anyone to be totally won over by it, but it should help with putting some fears to rest.
I'm more in favor of the Rams staying/stadium etc whereas shortly before I could have cared less about them leaving or winning. I just don't care for the NFL or football in general.rawest1 wrote:Agreed; I'm excited to read the rest of this series (it's apparently set to be a 4-parter).38N 90W wrote:Excellent article.rawest1 wrote:Some pretty solid background of the mystery that is "Silent" Stan Kroenke as it relates to his often-hidden intentions with the Rams:
http://101sports.com/category/misc-blog ... Keep-Rams/
If you're anything like me and have been obsessing over the Rams and their future here for the past 2-3 years, then there isn't really anything new here. That said, I haven't seen a single article that cogently synthesizes all of the past data together through the thesis of Stan and the Rams and St. Louis the way this one does.
I'm glad this information & line of reasoning is becoming more mainstream and reaching a wider audience. I don't expect anyone to be totally won over by it, but it should help with putting some fears to rest.
But that doesn't mean I want the taxpayer paying a ton of this. And, personally, I still want my Saint Louis MLS team.
I just heard that the Rams are passing on Rob Ryan for defensive coordinator. Good news, IMO. I just don't understand the media fascination with the guy.
He's just a loudmouth and he looks ridiculous and he does stuff like this:framer wrote:I just heard that the Rams are passing on Rob Ryan for defensive coordinator. Good news, IMO. I just don't understand the media fascination with the guy.
Absolutely right though, lousy coordinator and I'm glad we passed on him.
Have we learned, yet, not to bring anything at all out of Texas?rawest1 wrote:He's just a loudmouth and he looks ridiculous and he does stuff like this:framer wrote:I just heard that the Rams are passing on Rob Ryan for defensive coordinator. Good news, IMO. I just don't understand the media fascination with the guy.
Absolutely right though, lousy coordinator and I'm glad we passed on him.
Fisher will do the right thing.
- 8,155
^ At first I mistook Rob Ryan for Alex rallying the troops to stand up for urbanism. I'm not sure he has that much hair though.
- 8,912
Arbitration ruled in favor of the Rams. Sad news for the DOME and CVC. You'll hear more shortly in a press release.
I understand the position that CVC had to take and their hopefull tact that arbitration would see their definition of what is Top Tier. However, the hard comparative numbers is that NFL has built significant number top end stadiums since the dome was built and the lease signed. This lease was written in the Rams favor to get them out of LA in first place and arbitration went with what has been built instead of trying to define words within that lease.moorlander wrote:Arbitration ruled in favor of the Rams. Sad news for the DOME and CVC. You'll hear more shortly in a press release.
What I think is good, that this decision is coming sooner than later. It is a step that needs to be taken and better for the region.
I don't think that this is bad news necessarily. This gives the Rams a possible opportunity to opt out of their lease and build the stadium they want. Now the bad part of that may be some public money. But if the Rams get out of the lease and build a new stadium some where still in the metro area, that means the CVC can now work on getting conventions on another 5 month out of the year. Seems to me like a win for everybody. A lot has to go right though.
I just don't see how the EJ dome needs to be upgraded to the tune of $700-million. The Louisiana Superdome - now The Mercedes-Benz Superdome - is one of the first and oldest domes in the world. After pumping $350-million into it post-Katrina, it is considered by some to be a top tier stadium.
This is sad. I don't know, but I think if the CVC hadn't come in with such a low-ball plan, maybe the Rams wouldn't have high-balled the CVC. They have to come to a reasonable middle.....$350-$400-million.
However, St. Louis has to pay up or risk falling behind more and more in prestige with a Rams relocation.
There is a reason why Minneapolis, San Francisco, Atlanta and L.A. are willing to pay over a $1-billion for new stadiums. Obviously, it would be helpful to explore how these other cities are doing it.
Despite what some local taxpayers may think, St. Louis needs the Rams as a major sports franchise or the region would have never courted the Rams so hard in the first place.
Instead of saying "no" too fast, it would behoove St. Louis to consider the real consequences of losing an NFL franchise - even if the Rams have been on the losing side for about a decade.
Other cities could probably start dangling carrots tomorrow. They include:
1. Los Angeles
2. San Antonio
3. Salt Lake City
4. Portland
5. Orlando
6. Columbus
7. Chicago
8. Omaha
9. Norfolk
10. Sacramento
I don't know how the funding formula would work in St. Louis, but here's how I see it. Other NFL owners are putting up big dough for their new stadiums. In Atlanta, the owners are willing to put up $800-million. Stan has to pony up too. It's only fair.
$300-million borrowed from the NFL by Stan (The Other Man)
$200-million hotel/motel/entertainment tax (St. Louis City/County, St. Charles, Jefferson)
$200-million from the CVC, which it says that it has.
____________
$700-milllion
*Note: And please find some way to keep open Broadway. No more closed streets in downtown, please!!!
This is sad. I don't know, but I think if the CVC hadn't come in with such a low-ball plan, maybe the Rams wouldn't have high-balled the CVC. They have to come to a reasonable middle.....$350-$400-million.
However, St. Louis has to pay up or risk falling behind more and more in prestige with a Rams relocation.
There is a reason why Minneapolis, San Francisco, Atlanta and L.A. are willing to pay over a $1-billion for new stadiums. Obviously, it would be helpful to explore how these other cities are doing it.
Despite what some local taxpayers may think, St. Louis needs the Rams as a major sports franchise or the region would have never courted the Rams so hard in the first place.
Instead of saying "no" too fast, it would behoove St. Louis to consider the real consequences of losing an NFL franchise - even if the Rams have been on the losing side for about a decade.
Other cities could probably start dangling carrots tomorrow. They include:
1. Los Angeles
2. San Antonio
3. Salt Lake City
4. Portland
5. Orlando
6. Columbus
7. Chicago
8. Omaha
9. Norfolk
10. Sacramento
I don't know how the funding formula would work in St. Louis, but here's how I see it. Other NFL owners are putting up big dough for their new stadiums. In Atlanta, the owners are willing to put up $800-million. Stan has to pony up too. It's only fair.
$300-million borrowed from the NFL by Stan (The Other Man)
$200-million hotel/motel/entertainment tax (St. Louis City/County, St. Charles, Jefferson)
$200-million from the CVC, which it says that it has.
____________
$700-milllion
*Note: And please find some way to keep open Broadway. No more closed streets in downtown, please!!!
- 3,433
As a charter PSL holder, I don't see anything in the Rams proposal that will improve my game-day experience over what I have now. I was hoping for just seat padding in my lower bowl seat. But in reading both proposals, I saw nothing for regular fans in the seats. Just more stores. All the improvements were In the club and suite areas. But If they make improvements, I'm sure they will Expect me to pay more for the pleasure.
- 1,792
With the Rams talking about a new stadium (possible outside of downtown, and the owners of Union Station talking about adding "convention space" What are the chances of making Union Station our new Convention Center and tear the current one down restoring street grid and reconnecting to the landing etc.