Jump to content

Off topic: Screw Stan Kroenke


Bonner89
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, BilliesBy40 said:

Don't let time and a single vote distract from the fact the Bidwills moved the Cardinals from St. Louis to Phoenix.

I was mad for years about that but I’ve come to realize that was on St. Louis and it’s “leaders” not the the Bidwells. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 288
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

1 hour ago, Box and Won said:

STL dropped the ball on that one.  Big time.

I was told that Bidwell would make significant anonymous gifts to the athletic department. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, willie said:

I was told that Bidwell would make significant anonymous gifts to the athletic department. 

Not only to the SLU Ath Dept.  The Bidwells, without any fanfare or publicity made contributions to the STL Chapter of the National Football Foundation, a charity group providing scholarship to local high school athletes at colleges.  When the Rams said AMF (see above) the AZ Cardinals, who had been gone from STL for many years provided $$$ to help make up the loss from the Kroenke criminals!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, willie said:

I was told that Bidwell would make significant anonymous gifts to the athletic department. 

-wow, had not heard about this, I like folks that give to The U

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, willie said:

I was told that Bidwell would make significant anonymous gifts to the athletic department. 

Bill Bidwill gave a lot of money to different organizations and charities in the St Louis area after the team left.  I believe the family has continued to do so since Bill’s passing.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the topic of NFL expansion to STL I could have sworn  Randy K responded to someone in a tweet that there is virtually no chance STL gets an expansion team because the NFL wants nothing to do with STL and STL wants nothing to do with the NFL which makes sense and is fine with me.  Perhaps I’m just back on my crazy pills, perhaps he subsequently erased it, but I don’t see it anymore. 

I can’t believe there are people in STL that still want an NFL team. Do you guys like getting cucked too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the NFL was really interested in minority ownership, St. Louis would be the place to look.

They should try to recruit Dave Steward of WWT.

He is brilliant as well as being one of the few billionaires in the U.S.A. that just happens to be black.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those who say St. Louis screwed up and that is why the Big Red left are correct however that is not the whole story.

The Big Red was a futile franchise that drafted poorly and ran off Don Coryell.

The futile franchise destroyed Oklahoma coaching legend Bud Wilkinson and fired Gene Stallings who won a National Championship as the head coach of Alabama after he was fired by the Big Red.

78, 79, 80 and 81 were brutal seasons for the Big Red.  In 82-84 they had records of 5-4 strike season, 8-7-1, I was at the Monday night 10-10 tie game with 4 missed field goals and 9-7.

After 84 Bidwill wanted a new stadium for a team whose historical record was under 500, (481).

The investors of a new stadium wanted a commitment from Bidwill of putting a good team on the field before investing in the team.

In hindsight they should have built the stadium but would the Big Red demand another new stadium now to replace the one they built?  Probably

St. Louis city and county is a political mess.  The city and county messed up the expansion team that eventually went to Jacksonville.

 I am glad the corrupt NFL is not in St. Louis and I hope the plaintiffs win a billion dollar suit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It won't happen, but if we actually got a billion dollar settlement I wish they would throw the money into a sort of scaled down version of what Kroenke proposed for the dome.  Make it a 40-50k stadium with a retractable roof.  A facility that would put us into the Final Four rotation, could host big time international soccer and would serve as a venue for destination stadium events.  The kind of things that draw visitors to and attention to the region both nationally and internationally. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Slu let the dogs out? said:

On the topic of NFL expansion to STL I could have sworn  Randy K responded to someone in a tweet that there is virtually no chance STL gets an expansion team because the NFL wants nothing to do with STL and STL wants nothing to do with the NFL which makes sense and is fine with me.  Perhaps I’m just back on my crazy pills, perhaps he subsequently erased it, but I don’t see it anymore. 

I can’t believe there are people in STL that still want an NFL team. Do you guys like getting cucked too?

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Duff Man said:

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.

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.

A NFL team isn't a real flagship tenant.  It only fills ten days a year and it actually makes it harder to schedule other events because 24 weeks have to be blocked off the schedule annually until the NFL releases their schedule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

again, i hope that st louis is smart enough to pay off the dome and the soccer field with their settlement.

and i believe they will settle.   the owners will not want their financials out.   particularly since they know they are going to lose.   they will settle.  

i personally hate the nfl.  but we all know an nfl franchise is pretty much golden even if poorly run and an annual loser.   some billionaire is waiting to buy and wants to be in the snob club of an nfl owner.  thus if they want to include in the settlement a franchise plus a billion dollars why not take that?  

again, i quit the nfl when all the kneeling started so i dont know a lot about it and really dont care about it.  wouldnt go to a game no matter what.   but i am fascinated by this suit and am watching the development very closely and very entertained.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we get any settlement money my suggestion would be to spend every dollar and resource convincing Nathan’s to move the hot dog eating contest to the riverfront.  
 

If that failed I’d pay off debt on dome and allocate the rest into making the convention center the premier convention center in the country. I know there are already plans to upgrade it but let’s crank this thing to 11. Money maker for city and county. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, brianstl said:

A NFL team isn't a real flagship tenant.  It only fills ten days a year and it actually makes it harder to schedule other events because 20 weeks have to be blocked off the schedule annually until the NFL releases their schedule.

 

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, billiken_roy said:

again, i hope that st louis is smart enough to pay off the dome and the soccer field with their settlement.

and i believe they will settle.   the owners will not want their financials out.   particularly since they know they are going to lose.   they will settle.  

i personally hate the nfl.  but we all know an nfl franchise is pretty much golden even if poorly run and an annual loser.   some billionaire is waiting to buy and wants to be in the snob club of an nfl owner.  thus if they want to include in the settlement a franchise plus a billion dollars why not take that?  

again, i quit the nfl when all the kneeling started so i dont know a lot about it and really dont care about it.  wouldnt go to a game no matter what.   but i am fascinated by this suit and am watching the development very closely and very entertained.  

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Duff Man said:

 

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.

I think at least a significant portion of the award would be limited on what it could be spent on by the fact it would be going to the St. Louis Regional Convention and Sports Complex Authority.  I think state statue limits that money to be spent on sports and convention facilities the authority itself operates or decides to build.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given that the City and County are named as plaintiffs, a settlement wouldn't all be going to the St. Louis Regional Convention and Sports Complex Authority. Would there really be terms on how the funds have to be used? Why would they have to be used collectively, and why would the state have say over their usage?

I wish it could go to just basic city services. The silver bullet projects have never really paid off. It would be better to improve everyone's day-to-day lives. It takes like 20 minutes for an ambulance/cop to show up now. Trash pickups are being missed. City residents have always relied on a bizarre unofficial system of having to call and complain to their alderperson instead of being able to go through the services themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, brianstl said:

I think at least a significant portion of the award would be limited on what it could be spent on by the fact it would be going to the St. Louis Regional Convention and Sports Complex Authority.  I think state statue limits that money to be spent on sports and convention facilities the authority itself operates or decides to build.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Duff Man said:

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.

when the rams left, i still watched the nfl on tv.  i am a sports nut, so even though i indeed hated stanley and his rams that point, i was still enjoying football on tv. 

kapernick started his kneeling nonsense the next year and that is when i said, that's the last straw and i havent watched a complete game since.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The settlement you are all discussing is , almost by definition, a compromise.  I have been involved in quite a few "settlements" and in all of them, we gave (or accepted) something short of what we thought was possible in a trial.  So if we can get a settlement with the NFL/Kroenke and the amount is reasonable-TAKE IT AND RUN! 

First going to trial does NOT guarantee a win and even if we prevail we don't know what amount we would be awarded.

Even more reason to settle is the time factor.  A win would clearly be appealed and tied up in that process for many, many years.  Deep pockets can tie this case up for a long time. In the meantime we would see nothing, and even if the "W" is upheld in a final decision,, the amount is, more than often, reduced. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Pistol said:

Given that the City and County are named as plaintiffs, a settlement wouldn't all be going to the St. Louis Regional Convention and Sports Complex Authority. Would there really be terms on how the funds have to be used? Why would they have to be used collectively, and why would the state have say over their usage?

I wish it could go to just basic city services. The silver bullet projects have never really paid off. It would be better to improve everyone's day-to-day lives. It takes like 20 minutes for an ambulance/cop to show up now. Trash pickups are being missed. City residents have always relied on a bizarre unofficial system of having to call and complain to their alderperson instead of being able to go through the services themselves.

+1 out of likes.

Basic services would have an immediate impact and improve the quality of life for many city residents. I like it. Sadly I don't see that occurring...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Pistol said:

Given that the City and County are named as plaintiffs, a settlement wouldn't all be going to the St. Louis Regional Convention and Sports Complex Authority. Would there really be terms on how the funds have to be used? Why would they have to be used collectively, and why would the state have say over their usage?

I wish it could go to just basic city services. The silver bullet projects have never really paid off. It would be better to improve everyone's day-to-day lives. It takes like 20 minutes for an ambulance/cop to show up now. Trash pickups are being missed. City residents have always relied on a bizarre unofficial system of having to call and complain to their alderperson instead of being able to go through the services themselves.

There would be terms on the St. Louis Regional Convention and Sports Complex Authority portion.  The enacting legislation that created the authority sets out how they must operate and how they can spend their money.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Pistol said:

Given that the City and County are named as plaintiffs, a settlement wouldn't all be going to the St. Louis Regional Convention and Sports Complex Authority. Would there really be terms on how the funds have to be used? Why would they have to be used collectively, and why would the state have say over their usage?

I wish it could go to just basic city services. The silver bullet projects have never really paid off. It would be better to improve everyone's day-to-day lives. It takes like 20 minutes for an ambulance/cop to show up now. Trash pickups are being missed. City residents have always relied on a bizarre unofficial system of having to call and complain to their alderperson instead of being able to go through the services themselves.

The problem with using the money for city services is that it is one time money and when it is gone then what happens to the city service that people have gotten use to having.  It is like governments trying to use bond issue money to pay for on going expenses not only is it not allowable it is a poor strategy.  On going expenses should be paid for with on going revenue.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cheeseman said:

The problem with using the money for city services is that it is one time money and when it is gone then what happens to the city service that people have gotten use to having.  It is like governments trying to use bond issue money to pay for on going expenses not only is it not allowable it is a poor strategy.  On going expenses should be paid for with on going revenue.  

+1 Definitely wouldn't be the most efficient use of settlement money.

What needs to happen regardless of hypothetical settlement money is a complete redesign of Tucker Blvd. between Cole Street (Square office) and Clark (City Hall). 8 lanes of traffic is absolutely insane. Scale it down to 4 lanes at most and make it pedestrian- and biker-friendly. It would reduce traffic (what little there is), traffic accidents, and no more drag racing down Tucker. Area could be used for festivals, markets, gathering space to watch the Blues in their next Stanley Cup in the year 2095, etc. Great example is Lancaster Blvd. in Lancaster, CA:

https://www.cnu.org/what-we-do/build-great-places/lancaster-boulevard

Obviously some differences between Lancaster/Lancaster Blvd and St. Louis/Tucker Blvd and the built environment around them but endgame is the same. I'm sure @SShoe has even better ideas. Also curious how you’d spend settlement money if awarded  😃

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I don't like the NFL or what it did, I still like watching football and would support a new team.  I also believe that having an NFL team gives your city a certain level of credibility.  For instance, I bet most people wouldn't guess that Buffalo's entire metro region has barely over $1million residents, since they view it as an NFL city.

Here is my proposal for settlement.  The NFL pays off our debts relating to the dome and anything else we are out, they build us a new stadium, and give us a team.  The team is owned by the City and County jointly.  This would only be for purposes of who gets the profits.  The team would be run by an independent board (former players and such) that would ensure that the team is run properly and adequately funded.

An article I just read from a year ago said that each NFL team last season received a $296 million last season in national revenue sharing.  I would assume that each team brings in about another $50 million or so on its own.  So, let's assume team revenue of $350 million.

The salary cap last year was $208 million.  That's just the players.  Let's guess high and say that it costs another $92 million to pay coaches, staff, stadium upkeep, etc.  That puts expenses at $300 million with revenue of $350 million.  This means that the City and County could share $50 million each year to do with what they want.  To Pistol's point above, this could be a true life raft to the City and County and be used to actually help the residents.  Most profits seen by an NFL team go to one guy who is already very rich.  How amazing would it be for City and County to own the team and receive those benefits to be used to improve the lives of their residents. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...