GOSLU68 Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 and if not do they have the money to play this game? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiken Rich Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 and if not do they have the money to play this game? As a lover of the Dallas Cowboys and the Bills, I'd love to see the Lambs leave town. Ah....no NFC blackouts and less competition for the sports $$$......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TEE Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Rich that is not a very civic minded attitude anyway, I am not saying I know anything, but from what I have heard and can fill in between the lines, I put this out there: Last December when #28's number was retired and the commissioner was here for the event, there was a dinner at Tony's. Bernie quickly dismissed the meeting as meaning nothing. What took place was a dinner with Gooddell, Kronke, Tony Ponturo of the Brewery, Nierdorf of Centene, the owner of the Houston AB distributor(Largest AD Wholesaler in the world) and a few other St.Louis business people and some NFL folks. Basically Kronke is most likely putting together a group that will at some point buy the team from the Rosenbloom family. Stan only needs to own 30% of the team under an ownership group scenario, like the STL Cardinal baseball group. Stan currently owns 40%. Bernie dismisses this meeting/dinner as some NFL/AB marketing visit, wrong. AB is very influential, they are like the greasemen when you need something to happen. When Chip decides to sell his families part of the team, Stan will have a group in place to purchase the remaining piece. Now for the stadium issues. These are just controled leaks to get the region ready for a new stadium. The Dome will be replaced in 5 to 6 years, the only question is how much the region has to cough up, how much Kronke and Rams pay, how much the NFL loans the Rams and where will it be located - "blighted" land on the riverfront near Soulard and the largest brewer of beer's headquarters. Could be a conspiracy theory or just my imagination......however I did see the meeting agenda sheet for the dinner at Tony's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetorch Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 The NFL doesn't like groups to own its teams. Kroenke is ineligible to own a controlling stake in an NFL franchise as well. He owns teams in other NFL markets. He would have to dissolve his ownership of the Avalanche and Nuggets in order to procure a controlling interest in the rams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 ^ I'd much rather see the Dome updated/renovated than a new stadium built, as much as I would prefer outdoor football. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 The NFL doesn't like groups to own its teams. Kroenke is ineligible to own a controlling stake in an NFL franchise as well. He owns teams in other NFL markets. He would have to dissolve his ownership of the Avalanche and Nuggets in order to procure a controlling interest in the rams. Or pass it along to say, his son. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clock_Tower Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Rich that is not a very civic minded attitude anyway, I am not saying I know anything, but from what I have heard and can fill in between the lines, I put this out there: Last December when #28's number was retired and the commissioner was here for the event, there was a dinner at Tony's. Bernie quickly dismissed the meeting as meaning nothing. What took place was a dinner with Gooddell, Kronke, Tony Ponturo of the Brewery, Nierdorf of Centene, the owner of the Houston AB distributor(Largest AD Wholesaler in the world) and a few other St.Louis business people and some NFL folks. Basically Kronke is most likely putting together a group that will at some point buy the team from the Rosenbloom family. Stan only needs to own 30% of the team under an ownership group scenario, like the STL Cardinal baseball group. Stan currently owns 40%. Bernie dismisses this meeting/dinner as some NFL/AB marketing visit, wrong. AB is very influential, they are like the greasemen when you need something to happen. When Chip decides to sell his families part of the team, Stan will have a group in place to purchase the remaining piece. Now for the stadium issues. These are just controled leaks to get the region ready for a new stadium. The Dome will be replaced in 5 to 6 years, the only question is how much the region has to cough up, how much Kronke and Rams pay, how much the NFL loans the Rams and where will it be located - "blighted" land on the riverfront near Soulard and the largest brewer of beer's headquarters. Could be a conspiracy theory or just my imagination......however I did see the meeting agenda sheet for the dinner at Tony's Good post. Believe you are right on. The nice thing about the stadium is that it can be use for other purposes (convention center space, etc.) and not have to be torn down only like old Busch Stadium - no use if new stadium is built. Don't forget Riverport. We may have the McNary dome yet!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Or pass it along to say, his son.Or he could move Avs and Nuggets under the ownership of THF and have Michael Staenberg of THF become the managing partner for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Don't forget Riverport. We may have the McNary dome yet!! Thank God that never happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiken Rich Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 ^ I'd much rather see the Dome updated/renovated than a new stadium built, as much as I would prefer outdoor football. You're thinking too small box. Two words: FOOTBALL (freakin') VILLAGE (baby!) Knock down "the landing" and make the Arch grounds a big surface lot and surround it all with FOOTBALL VILLAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
satrap Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 You're thinking too small box. Two words: FOOTBALL (freakin') VILLAGE (baby!) Knock down "the landing" and make the Arch grounds a big surface lot and surround it all with FOOTBALL VILLAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ^^^Hilarious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinfootes Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 As a lover of the Dallas Cowboys and the Bills, I'd love to see the Lambs leave town. Ah....no NFC blackouts and less competition for the sports $$$......... Why don't you quit being a cheapskate and buy the NFL package? Or maybe move to Dallas! You could go from Barnhart (the Big B ) to Dallas (the Big D). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinfootes Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 You're thinking too small box. Two words: FOOTBALL (freakin') VILLAGE (baby!) Knock down "the landing" and make the Arch grounds a big surface lot and surround it all with FOOTBALL VILLAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is actually pretty good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMA Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 Just my 2 cents......... I would imagine despite excellent advice is structuring the estate, the two kids are going to be looking at a big tab due the IRS once the estate settles... they either refinance the team (and sell) or sell it sooner than later......taxes will most likely be due within a year...nine mos after estate closes...and Kronke as a minorty owner probably doesn't like that approach to refinance........... The Rosenbloom's own 80%....Kronke owns 20%........brother and sister have to agreeon a strategy, but its drives the value if they do not have a stadium deal in place...prior to the sale.... IMO. it is extremely doubtfull, sufficent funds will be raised via bonds (and dedicated taxes to repay said bonds) to renovate the stadium....meaning the Rams could potentially leave within the decade.....just the scenario Shaw wants for the Rosenbloom kids........ Seems to me what is needed is..... resolution by th Rosenblooms of their strategy...do they NEED to sell?... if so, will Kronke decide to rearange his interests and pursue? To keep local, under new ownership or not, ammass the public support for cutting a deal to keep the team in St Louis.... A power broker needs to emerge form the business or publice side with some real clout......the kind that was seen in the Civic Progress days....of course, lead by the Post Dispatch and its editorial page....as well changes in the business community...they're in short supply..... If nobody steps forward to lead the local effort to cut a new deal for the stadium, new ownership or not, I would bet the Rams exit the community at some point... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 Kroenke actually owns 40%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 They are already starting to work the new stadium angle and I have already grown sick of hearing about it. They can move for all I care. Let them go and target an NBA team. The NBA team's 41 games downtown would do far more for the downtown economy than the 10 you get from the Rams. Plus it would open the America's Center up for more conventions. Those conventions do far more for the region's economy than the Rams do. Throwing massive amounts of public money at professional teams is just wasting that money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjray Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 They are already starting to work the new stadium angle and I have already grown sick of hearing about it. They can move for all I care. Let them go and target an NBA team. The NBA team's 41 games downtown would do far more for the downtown economy than the 10 you get from the Rams. Plus it would open the America's Center up far more conventions. Those conventions do far more for the region's economy than the Rams do. Throwing massive amounts of public money at professional teams is just wasting that money. Agree with Brian. The original dome stadium deal only made sense with public money due to its coupling with the convention center. In no other location does it make sense for the city / state to throw big money at the Rams to build them a new stadium. Renovate the existing stadium, OK, maybe depending on the details. New stadium from the ground up? Forget about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 no way should they build another stadium. let them go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 It's really disappointing to hear all the negative comments about the Rams. Next to Billiken basketball, the Rams are the team I'm most passionate about. I'm sure fans in cities like Nashville and Baltimore (that had teams move to them, just like St. Louis) don't exhibit this kind of negativity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 no way should they build another stadium. let them go. With the price tag of these new NFL stadiums coming in at just under a billion (Indianapolis) or over a billion (New York and Dallas), the idea that St. Louis will help pay for a new stadium just a shade over a decade since the last one went up is completely ludicrous. Owners would be stupid to ask, and the people would be stupid to pay. The city deserves to have the team stay but shouldn't be gouged for it. The dome isn't perfect, but is a perfectly viable NFL venue in addition to being convention floor space (wouldn't have been built otherwise) and perfectly suited for events like the NCAA Final Four. I guess I don't know a whole lot about the current situation, but I'd hate to see the Rams go this quickly (And where to, anyway? Back to LA?). If the team could really fetch $900 million and were to be moved out of St. Louis, the city deserves some of that and could recoup at least some of what it paid to build the dome. I don't think taxpayers would have been sold on the idea of laying down hundreds of millions for a 12-year tenant. As much credit as the NFL receives for the product it puts on the field, popularity of the sport, and revenue generated, one thing is for sure: the league and its teams are fundamentally ruled by greed. The Green Bay Packers, as a non-profit community-owned team, are the exception. Too bad that ownership structure is technically against the cash-grubbing NFL's rules (requiring a maximum of 32 owners per team, one of which must possess at least a 30% stake), and only can happen because they were grandfathered into the league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 It's really disappointing to hear all the negative comments about the Rams. Next to Billiken basketball, the Rams are the team I'm most passionate about. I'm sure fans in cities like Nashville and Baltimore (that had teams move to them, just like St. Louis) don't exhibit this kind of negativity.I love the Rams, but they shouldn't get another dollar of public money. Owning an NFL team is a license to print money. It is a joke that this stuff is already getting floated out there. It takes some balls to float this stuff out there when the economy is in the crapper and inflation is on the rise. Screw them if this is the route they want to go. Find some sucker in another town who wants to give you their hard earned dollars through spending tax money on a stadium. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 I love the Rams, but they shouldn't get another dollar of public money. Owning an NFL team is a license to print money. It is a joke that this stuff is already getting floated out there. It takes some balls to float this stuff out there when the economy is in the crapper and inflation is on the rise. Screw them if this is the route they want to go. Find some sucker in another town who wants to give you their hard earned dollars through spending tax money on a stadium. I don't think a new stadium is necessary. The CVC is spending $30 million on improvements to the dome as part of the city/county's obligation to the Rams' lease. When the lease was negotiated, the stipulation that the dome be maintained/improved to be among the top venues in the NFL might have made sense, but now in this era of incredibly extravagant football stadia like the ones in Arizona and Dallas, I just don't see how it's feasible for the dome to keep up with the competition. It went from state-of-the-art to outdated in just a few years. Maybe the CVC could renegotiate that clause? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 I don't think a new stadium is necessary. The CVC is spending $30 million on improvements to the dome as part of the city/county's obligation to the Rams' lease. When the lease was negotiated, the stipulation that the dome be maintained/improved to be among the top venues in the NFL might have made sense, but now in this era of incredibly extravagant football stadia like the ones in Arizona and Dallas, I just don't see how it's feasible for the dome to keep up with the competition. It went from state-of-the-art to outdated in just a few years. Maybe the CVC could renegotiate that clause? my question is what idiot allowed the "must be among the top 8 stadiums or else" clause in the first place? to not have the foresight of the impact of that clause is beyond believable. imo, you dont do the deal in the first place if that is a necessity. as brian stated, it now appears the taxpayers built a 12 year stadium that wont have an nfl tenant past 2014 now. just stupidity or audacity to take the public's money. box, for anyone to assume that $30m would be enough to maintain a top 8 standard in this day and age is just not possible. as you stated, the extravagance of the newest and greatest is off the charts. the st louis taxpayers and the fandom that has embraced the rams have basically been bamboozled imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 my question is what idiot allowed the "must be among the top 8 stadiums or else" clause in the first place? to not have the foresight of the impact of that clause is beyond believable. imo, you dont do the deal in the first place if that is a necessity. as brian stated, it now appears the taxpayers built a 12 year stadium that wont have an nfl tenant past 2014 now. just stupidity or audacity to take the public's money. box, for anyone to assume that $30m would be enough to maintain a top 8 standard in this day and age is just not possible. as you stated, the extravagance of the newest and greatest is off the charts. the st louis taxpayers and the fandom that has embraced the rams have basically been bamboozled imo. Foresight has never been St. Louis' forte. I don't think that $30m is enough to keep the dome among the top 8, but at least the CVC is holding up its end of the bargain for the time being. When the next round of improvements is needed, that will be a killer unless that clause is renegotiated. I'll just add the Rams to my list of quixotic interests: -Downtown development -Billiken basketball -Rams Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 my question is what idiot allowed the "must be among the top 8 stadiums or else" clause in the first place? to not have the foresight of the impact of that clause is beyond believable. imo, you dont do the deal in the first place if that is a necessity. as brian stated, it now appears the taxpayers built a 12 year stadium that wont have an nfl tenant past 2014 now. just stupidity or audacity to take the public's money. box, for anyone to assume that $30m would be enough to maintain a top 8 standard in this day and age is just not possible. as you stated, the extravagance of the newest and greatest is off the charts. the st louis taxpayers and the fandom that has embraced the rams have basically been bamboozled imo. My guess is it was Eagleton. I agree the clause to be in the top 25% of all league stadiums was a bad idea but it probably was what was required to get the team here. This clause will make the Dome obsolete by the end of 2014 when the lease expires and the region better start thinking about where to build a new stadium - there is no choice in this matter or you just say to the Rams leave and don't let the door hit you in the behind. There are ways to provide tax money without it coming from the current tax revenue stream but it will take some creative and open thinking to do so. If we loose this team there will never be another one here. The region really can not let that happen. This stadium issue is nobody's fault it is simply the way of the world today - like it or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.