Jump to content

Duff Man

Billikens.com Donor
  • Posts

    947
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Previous Fields

  • Favorite Billiken
    John Duff

Recent Profile Visitors

5,307 profile views

Duff Man's Achievements

Junior

Junior (4/7)

  1. The SLRCSCA or CVC or whatever is funded by the City and County, who are co-plaintiffs. I'm sure it'll be like the Simpsons trying to figure out how to spend the oil money (won't somebody please think of the children) when it comes to how to spend it, and I don't necessarily have confidence it will be spent well...but I just think if we're using it for a new stadium, we need a partner (a team) who is willing to help maintain it. https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/RamsNFL.pdf
  2. The Dome will be paid off by the time the settlement is reached (or damages enforced). The owners can't just make Stan settle nor can they make the STL lawyers accept a settlement. If the owners know they are going to lose, surely the STL lawyers know they are going to win, so why settle unless the amount is greater than what think they can win. Why the owners include a permanent cut of their TV revenue in the settlement? So you didn't quit the NFL when Stan crapped on our city on his way out the door in 2016 but the final straw was African American players protesting police brutality? Gotcha.
  3. I'm sure there is some truth to the argument that the Rams made it harder for the Dome to book events in the 2nd half of the year. That said, you start the year with 10 events already booked. In a normal lease situation - which I know we didn't have because we built a stadium without a tenant and had no leverage in negotiations with the Rams in 1994 - but in a normal lease situation the flagship tenant is on the hook for some of the maintenance/operating overhead. How many weeks a year is your 50k retractable roof going to have events? How many of those events would have gone to Enterprise or the Dome (or the MLS stadium) had the new venue not existed? How many other cities have a 50k+ retractable roof stadium without a sports team that plays their home games there? Now, if you can guarantee that we're going to get the Final 4 every so many years, and Wrestlemania so many years, and USMNT/USWNT World Cup qualifiers so many years, and it's built somewhere that will actually enhance downtown and not just cannibalize from other venues...then maybe it would be a good idea... It just seems like there would be better ways to spend the money that would benefit the region 52 weeks a year.
  4. re: St Louis getting a team I think going back a few years, when it became clear the LA Chargers were a problem in terms of generating so much less revenue than anyone else, combined with the STL lawsuit becoming a bigger threat, there was some "fixer" talk within NFL circles that couldn't we just solve both problems by moving the Chargers to St Louis? Spanos has no incentive to move. He's got a sweet lease in Stan's stadium. They can't make the Spanos move. They can't make him sell. Even if they could, who would be willing to step up and buy the team and own them in St Louis? It would need to be someone who already has a ton of credibility in St Louis and many billions of dollars and someone the owners would accept into their club. Expansion talk is also an extreme longshot for many of the same reasons. STL (if they win) will get a lump cash payment, not a team or any kind of perpetual cut of revenue. The reason the lawsuit is such a problem is that it's exposing that the NFL doesn't follow it's own relocation guidelines - which normally a private institutions guidelines would be far less important than a binding lease between a regional authority and a sports team...but the issue is that the relocation guidelines are part of the grand bargain decades ago that allows the NFL to maintain it's antitrust exemption. I'm not a legal scholar but my understanding is that damages are tripled in anti trust cases. re: The owners will just settle Easier said than done. Realize the only way the STL lawyers would settle is if the offer is greater than what they think they're going to win in trial (multiplied by their confidence factor that they will prevail). Stan is on the hook for it all anyway - so presumably he's the one who would have to settle. re: Building a stadium with the settlement money Don't build a stadium without a flagship tenant. That's what got us into this mess in the first place. We're not going to build a retractable roof 50k stadium to host Final Fours once every decade and the occasional soccer game that won't be as intimate as the venue a few blocks away.
  5. Pitbull will always be cool in 2 places: New commit threads on Billikens.com and within the mind of Ken Strode
  6. Condolences for the family. Reality check for everyone else. Awful awful awful news, but if nothing else hug your loved ones and appreciate what you have, here and now. Tomorrow is promised to no one.
  7. Sekeue Barentine was good at 2 things: -busting his ass down the floor for the occasional easy bucket -inducing lane violations with his quadruple clutch FT attempts
  8. Add Oral Roberts to the ever growing list of 80s era MCC teams that have advanced to the Sweet 16 ahead of SLU. Best finish in parentheses. Xavier (2x Elite Eight) Marquette (Final 4) Butler (2x National Runner up) Dayton (Elite Eight) Loyola (Final Four) Oral Roberts
  9. The casino story was a smokescreen. There were reports from individuals that Carlos Martinez was at the Wheelhouse right before they got shut down the first time for not following protocols - and this was before anyone knew who tested positive or how much it would derail the season. Wainwright was out there in PR mode dismissing the casino story - but nobody in the media ever really dug into Carlos Martinez (and others?) clubbing activities leading to the team getting infected. Don't blame Gardner for having the audacity to call attention to it after we've never been given an adequate explanation for how the team got so infected after being so careful. At least Gardner had the sense to wait until after Selection Sunday so it would not be perhaps used against them by the committee.
  10. I thought I qualified my statement but reading comprehension is hard I guess. I'm not holding the first 2 years against Ford, just stating a fact that in 5 years not once has he had the team in a good spot for an at large bid.
  11. They were not in line for an at-large bid in 19-20 before the pandemic hit. I like Ford and he's had to endure a lot of BS that's out of his control. The program/roster is in a good spot heading into next year. That said, his record is what it is. He's 0 for 5 having his team in a good spot to earn an at large bid.
×
×
  • Create New...