Would be neat if they could build a roof/canopy similar to SoFi and have it extend over Broadway and the Plaza on the east side of Broadway.
- 977
The NFL apparently has longer term plans to expand to 40 teams. Hard to imagine them getting there without St. Louis.
But I agree, there is no appetite here to fund a stadium, nor should their be.
But I agree, there is no appetite here to fund a stadium, nor should their be.
I've said it before and I'll say it again:Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑Mar 13, 2023The NFL apparently has longer term plans to expand to 40 teams. Hard to imagine them getting there without St. Louis.
But I agree, there is no appetite here to fund a stadium, nor should their be.
Why on earth would we willingly enter into another business arrangement with an entity that has already dealt with us in such naked and unabashed bad faith? So much so that we sued for billions, and they were so scared they'd lose tthat they paid $800m to make it go away? What have they done that makes you think it would go any better this time through?
I know we like NFL football - I genuinely love the product! But it's the sports equivalent of an abusive relationship. The good doesn't excuse the abuse.
STL might deserve another NFL franchise, but the NFL (at least as presently constituted) doesn't deserve us.
-RBB
Of the 8 new teams, half would probably be international— London, Mexico City, Toronto (?) and possibly Munich (?). Maybe more.
You might see Portland, OKC, San Diego (?) and Orlando (?)
They will avoid us like the plaque. Just like the NBA.
You might see Portland, OKC, San Diego (?) and Orlando (?)
They will avoid us like the plaque. Just like the NBA.
^ That’s ridiculous. The NFL doesn’t hate St. Louis. They wanted a team back in LA and went along with Kroenke because he paid for the entire thing by himself. They’ll come back to STL if it helps their bottom line. And in 10-20 years, Stan and Jerry Jones and some of the other owners involved probably won’t even be alive anyways. St. Louis is the biggest market without a team now, it’ll come back eventually
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- 977
“The NFL doesn’t deserve us” is position I simply don’t understand. Also, the NFL doesn’t hate St Louis, or any city for that matter.rbb wrote:I've said it before and I'll say it again:Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑Mar 13, 2023The NFL apparently has longer term plans to expand to 40 teams. Hard to imagine them getting there without St. Louis.
But I agree, there is no appetite here to fund a stadium, nor should their be.
Why on earth would we willingly enter into another business arrangement with an entity that has already dealt with us in such naked and unabashed bad faith? So much so that we sued for billions, and they were so scared they'd lose tthat they paid $800m to make it go away? What have they done that makes you think it would go any better this time through?
I know we like NFL football - I genuinely love the product! But it's the sports equivalent of an abusive relationship. The good doesn't excuse the abuse.
STL might deserve another NFL franchise, but the NFL (at least as presently constituted) doesn't deserve us.
-RBB
The NFL will make money off a team in St Louis, why wouldn’t they include us as part of a larger expansion. From our perspective, having a team back in the region would be a serious economic boon for the region. Why wouldn’t we want it as long as we aren’t on the wrong end of funding the up front costs of bringing a team here.
They (the NBA and NFL) avoid us because the baseball Cardinals draw 3.4-3.5 million fans a year.shadrach wrote: ↑Mar 13, 2023Of the 8 new teams, half would probably be international— London, Mexico City, Toronto (?) and possibly Munich (?). Maybe more.
You might see Portland, OKC, San Diego (?) and Orlando (?)
They will avoid us like the plaque. Just like the NBA.
- 977
What does the Cardinals strong attendance have to do with attracting an NBA or NFL team?dweebe wrote:They (the NBA and NFL) avoid us because the baseball Cardinals draw 3.4-3.5 million fans a year.shadrach wrote: ↑Mar 13, 2023Of the 8 new teams, half would probably be international— London, Mexico City, Toronto (?) and possibly Munich (?). Maybe more.
You might see Portland, OKC, San Diego (?) and Orlando (?)
They will avoid us like the plaque. Just like the NBA.
I’d agree with you if it weren’t for the post-relocation court and settlement. St. Louis lawyers very publicly embarrassed many owners and challenged the character of the entire league. Not to mention $790m of cold hard cash.
On the local side. Missouri and Illinois aren’t interested in subsidizing. City or County aren’t in a position to subsidize and would likely require some aspect of community ownership.
Here is what it would take in my opinion.
- New NFL leadership.
- Very wealthy ownership group with strong relationship to existing NFL owners. Qualified owner likely doesn’t exist in region currently.
- St. Louis region at least matching (probably exceeding) US job and/or GDP growth for an extended period of time.
- At least partial community ownership of team.
On the local side. Missouri and Illinois aren’t interested in subsidizing. City or County aren’t in a position to subsidize and would likely require some aspect of community ownership.
Here is what it would take in my opinion.
- New NFL leadership.
- Very wealthy ownership group with strong relationship to existing NFL owners. Qualified owner likely doesn’t exist in region currently.
- St. Louis region at least matching (probably exceeding) US job and/or GDP growth for an extended period of time.
- At least partial community ownership of team.
- 977
I’m certain the post relocation drama upset a lot of NFL leadership. But if the money is right, they’ll put emotion aside and do what’s best for their wallets. I’m confident in that.
Getting the ownership group is certainly one of the biggest hurdles, though I would point out the the ownership group doesn’t have to be local. There are a few teams in the league now where that is the case.
There is definitely no appetite in Missouri or Illinois to subsidize heavily, but that doesn’t mean we can’t target a somewhat modest refresh of the Dome that isn’t a huge price tag. I don’t agree that we shouldn’t throw any money at all at the NFL. Let’s do the math and do what’s best for the region, putting emotion around what happened in the past aside.
Getting the ownership group is certainly one of the biggest hurdles, though I would point out the the ownership group doesn’t have to be local. There are a few teams in the league now where that is the case.
There is definitely no appetite in Missouri or Illinois to subsidize heavily, but that doesn’t mean we can’t target a somewhat modest refresh of the Dome that isn’t a huge price tag. I don’t agree that we shouldn’t throw any money at all at the NFL. Let’s do the math and do what’s best for the region, putting emotion around what happened in the past aside.
Definitely seems to be a number of people here underestimating the capacity for grudge-holding by petty rich white folks and their family members…especially considering many of those family members take over when the old man finally dies.I’d agree with you if it weren’t for the post-relocation court and settlement. St. Louis lawyers very publicly embarrassed many owners and challenged the character of the entire league. Not to mention $790m of cold hard cash.
Yes, if a gigantic billionaire (STL based or otherwise) stepped up and said I want a team in STL, sure they’d listen. That billionaire doesn’t exist though.
Completely agree that the NFL doesn't hate STL - never intended to imply that they did. But it has been documented that they negotiated with STL in bad faith - in contradiction to their own rules and possibly in violation of at least some laws.Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑Mar 13, 2023“The NFL doesn’t deserve us” is position I simply don’t understand. Also, the NFL doesn’t hate St Louis, or any city for that matter.
That wasn't because they hate the city, it was because they're greedy and powerful and thought they could get away with it. I have less than zero desire to get into any negotiation or business arrangement with any organization that deals like that. If they were unscrupulous before they'll be unscrupulous again.
That has nothing to do with hurt feelings - quite the opposite, in fact. I'm saying don't let your desire for NFL-calibur entertainment dull your sense of reason about dealing with dishonest businessmen to get a new team.
-RBB
The NBA hates us because of the Silna brothers…dweebe wrote: ↑Mar 13, 2023They (the NBA and NFL) avoid us because the baseball Cardinals draw 3.4-3.5 million fans a year.shadrach wrote: ↑Mar 13, 2023Of the 8 new teams, half would probably be international— London, Mexico City, Toronto (?) and possibly Munich (?). Maybe more.
You might see Portland, OKC, San Diego (?) and Orlando (?)
They will avoid us like the plaque. Just like the NBA.
- 1,792
SO i think XFL is fine for St. Louis and as long as the league is viable i favor sticking with it. I just hope crowds for other teams is healthy, not worried about the battlehawks. I question the markets they chose to compete in and USFL competition isn't helpful.
NBA hates Silna not St. Louis. There are a lot of things they would want sorted before bringing a team here (ownership group and Arena are probably top of the list) but I don't see why they would have a grudge against st. louis the town.
NBA hates Silna not St. Louis. There are a lot of things they would want sorted before bringing a team here (ownership group and Arena are probably top of the list) but I don't see why they would have a grudge against st. louis the town.
The ferocity with which they blocked the Grizzlies move to St. Louis probably adds a lot to that perception.STLEnginerd wrote: ↑Mar 13, 2023NBA hates Silna not St. Louis. There are a lot of things they would want sorted before bringing a team here (ownership group and Arena are probably top of the list) but I don't see why they would have a grudge against st. louis the town.
Supposedly, after Katrina the New Orleans Hornets we’re going to finish their season in St. Louis and the NBA blocked that and sent them to OKC. Wonder how that turned out…
Maybe Toronto, but the logistics of European teams is not going to work. Mexico? It's practically a narco state right now.shadrach wrote: ↑Mar 13, 2023Of the 8 new teams, half would probably be international— London, Mexico City, Toronto (?) and possibly Munich (?). Maybe more.
You might see Portland, OKC, San Diego (?) and Orlando (?)
They will avoid us like the plaque. Just like the NBA.
I would be shocked at Orlando. Not sure they want to put a team between Tampa and Jacksonville to divide those fans any more than they already are. OKC isn’t near big enough.goat314 wrote: ↑Mar 14, 2023Maybe Toronto, but the logistics of European teams is not going to work. Mexico? It's practically a narco state right now.shadrach wrote: ↑Mar 13, 2023Of the 8 new teams, half would probably be international— London, Mexico City, Toronto (?) and possibly Munich (?). Maybe more.
You might see Portland, OKC, San Diego (?) and Orlando (?)
They will avoid us like the plaque. Just like the NBA.
- 1,792
Honestly I don't see them expanding anytime soon and getting to 40 will take decades. Maybe by then the StanK will have worn off.
Oakland, Portland and Salt Lake would probably be on the under consideration list too. Buffalo would fight a Toronto move hard. London and Mexico City are better for exhibition games, I am not certain a team would be well supported over the long haul. I can't see the NFL going to a market where they would play second fiddle to Futbol on a regular basis. Western cities are drying up and the water situation will ultimately constrain growth at some point.
Oakland, Portland and Salt Lake would probably be on the under consideration list too. Buffalo would fight a Toronto move hard. London and Mexico City are better for exhibition games, I am not certain a team would be well supported over the long haul. I can't see the NFL going to a market where they would play second fiddle to Futbol on a regular basis. Western cities are drying up and the water situation will ultimately constrain growth at some point.
- 2,631
Mexico City is absolutely enormous and is in the same general timezone as the US. Guadalajara and Monterrey could probably support teams too. Mexico would be far easier to penetrate than the European market.
- 1,792
True but the grass-roots/youth engagement with Football is very low. You would be almost entirely dependent on expats to drive interest. This works fine for a exhibition game each season, similar to the London game but i have no confidence in their ability to support a local team. Perhaps that could develop overtime though i doubt it. The case for pro-soccer in the US only developed after decades of investment in youth soccer.
- 1,792
. Holy cow that is complete mismanagement. They got 25 year commitment from a renovation of an existing facility. That's pretty decent in the grand scheme. Its scandalous that not only have they failed to pay down any debt but in fact they have actually increased the overall debt burden over that time. Better deal than st. louis got with the Rams but way worse management of the debt.Hard to find fault with the Bears in this case, they aren't even threatening to leave the Chicago metro and aren't really asking for new tax dollars either as far as i know. Also their plan at Arlington heights is pretty nice and wouldn't be possible at the current soldier field site.
- 1,609
Chicago kicked the can down the road and is suffering the consequences. By comparison we look smart and fiscally responsible.