New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[bluecoconuts]

Look, I believe the whole terrorist target argument is ridiculous on multiple levels, however if numerous different huge airlines are flying directly over the stadium during the games, that could be a pretty big detriment to the facility.

There's only really three flight paths that I know of that go over the site, going off the map, Chicago and St Louis go right over it, and Washington DC somewhat goes over the corner and even then it's hard to tell if it does or just skims by it. I believe the corner is where the stadium would be. NY is close, but it doesn't go over the site.

You have to keep in mind, flights take off to the west and land from the east, so they just have incoming flights to worry about, and even then there's not that much, no more than AEG would have. The noise from the planes is just a stupid idea, should Carson be worried because of freeway noise? Staples is in the middle of downtown LA, they don't have noise pollution? Nope, because there's 19,000 fans inside screaming, nobody can hear shit. Carson and Inglewood wont be able to hear planes or cars or anything passing by, especially if Inglewood has a retractable roof.

 

[ZigZagRam]

There's only really three flight paths that I know of that go over the site, going off the map, Chicago and St Louis go right over it, and Washington DC somewhat goes over the corner and even then it's hard to tell if it does or just skims by it. I believe the corner is where the stadium would be. NY is close, but it doesn't go over the site.

You have to keep in mind, flights take off to the west and land from the east, so they just have incoming flights to worry about, and even then there's not that much, no more than AEG would have. The noise from the planes is just a stupid idea, should Carson be worried because of freeway noise? Staples is in the middle of downtown LA, they don't have noise pollution? Nope, because there's 19,000 fans inside screaming, nobody can hear crap. Carson and Inglewood wont be able to hear planes or cars or anything passing by, especially if Inglewood has a retractable roof.

First, let me preface this by saying I'm aviation stupid.

Now, aren't flight paths altered semi-frequently. With the site being so close to the airport, it would seem like it would lead to extra traffic when this happens. Also, when planes have to circle before landing, wouldn't this bring more traffic to a closer site?

Again, be gentle. I know nothing about this stuff.

 

[Goose]

Dave Peacock Talks St. Louis Stadium Project, Future of Rams
Brendan Marks posted on March 03, 2015 10:59

Dave Peacock has been the point man of Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon's St. Louis stadium task force for the past several months, and continues to push the project forward despite Rams owner Stan Kroenke's apparent desire to relocate the team to Los Angeles.

Peacock joined The Hollywood Casino Press Box on Tuesday to discuss the project's progress and the future of the NFL in St. Louis.

And here is the transcription of some of the more noteworthy talking points:

On speed of the project:

"I don't think we're (moving quicker than we anticipated). We had a sense of urgency from the onset. We had certain things we needed to accomplish by the end of the year. I think what may be a positive surprise is the amount of support within the community. Terminal Railroad and Ameren are just great examples of stepping up. The laborers and the unions and how they came to the forefront very earlier. There are a lot of people that want to see St. Louis move forward. I think there are people excited about this project...as a transformative for the city of St. Louis. "

Did Rams and NFL help with design?

"We meet with the NFL and Rams on a fairly frequent basis. They came in with a lot of knowledge and experience. The league sees every stadium around the country and know some of the newer 'products' within new stadiums. And the Rams have specific things they've experienced within the Edward Jones Dome that weren't optimal. If you live in a house long enough there are things you want to improve. The changes (in the design) will become less and less as we progress. I felt it was important to start sharing with people where we're at. "

On field seen next to stadium in renderings:

"Designers come up with concepts and when there's space they're uncertain about, they get creative. That could become any number of things. Could become more parking, could become a kids' zone we've talked about...Those actually make the discussions and the meetings more interesting."

On conversation with Kroenke at Super Bowl:

"The conversation was great. It was good to reconnect. We didn't get into the topic too much. He was very appreciative of the work, he thought we're doing a great job and wants us to keep it up. Beyond that we talked a lot about Mizzou athletics. I think he's got options and I would think this option in St. Louis is becoming more real. We couldn't be more pleased with the engagement we're getting with the team."

On saying if stadium progresses, you can't see how 24 owners could approve relocation:

"Frankly our job is pretty simple...as far as what the objectives are. We need to show we can assemble the land...design a workable stadium that enhances the game day experience and provides the ameneties fans are looking for today. And we need to demonstrate financing. The financing includes three pieces. Some level of public funding, probably $125 to $150 million in personal seat licenses and then $450 million from league and team. That is consistent with what you've seen in places like in Minneapolis or Indianapolis. I'd say on the public finance side, there's still questions. The one thing we've all agreed is we're going to work within the laws we have. There's a pretty significant tax base with the Rams when you add up city, county and state. We don't want to lose that tax base. It could be in the $20 million-plus range."

- "We can't keep going backwards or the city 20 years from now will be a shell of what it is today. That said, the NFL alone isn't going to change that trajectory. But it is a piece. We need to start building the kind of region and community we want going forward."

You believe NFL will abide by relocation bylaws?

"Yeah, and the owners as well. We have a network of owners we talk to. I have to rely on the people that have the governance rights and even owners on a separate channel that are giving us very consistent communication saying 'if you do these things, you really as a region control your own destiny."

You ever talked to Raiders owner Mark Davis?

"No, we're focused on the Rams because they're our team. The goal is to keep the Rams. Teams can be prevented from moving, but owners can move. Ownership can chance within a team and that's probably more palatable than actually moving a team. I've been pretty transparent in saying I'm not that focused on what's going on with LA. We have to do our job, so we have blinders on, head down, focused on doing our work...so that we put ourselves in the best position."

You think NFL commish Roger Goodell could have role with Missouri legislature?

"I think if it makes sense and it is necessary I have no doubt he would do it."

http://www.insidestl.com/insideSTLc...-St-Louis-Stadium-Project-Future-of-Rams.aspx
_________________

 

[Goose]

If you have a chance to listen to the interview you should it is really well done.

 

[Goose]

Letter to Sen. Silvey Re: Bonds for an NFL Stadium
In a recent post on his site, Missouri State Senator Ryan Silvey filed legislation questioning the authority of Missouri Governor Jay Nixon to issue bonds in support of a proposed St. Louis stadium without a public vote.

Randy Karraker felt compelled to respond to Senator Silvey’s announcement via the following letter, which he sent to the senator’s office.

Dear Ryan:

Your name was brought to my attention by a listener who suggested I check your web page. I read with interest your essay about the recent bill you proposed in regards to re-issuing bonds, and thought I’d help you out with some errors in your essay, and ask some questions in the process.

Randy Karraker

1) You wrote ” It began earlier this year when the St. Louis Rams organization announced its intention of leaving the city after the 2015-2016 season unless a new stadium was built. The Governor hastily put together a $1 billion proposal to construct a state-of-the art sports complex.”

In fact, the Rams have not announced their intention to leave, and have never asked for a stadium. In an effort to prevent a state asset from walking out the door, Governor Nixon named David Peacock and Robert Blitz, who had been working on stadium plans for over a year, to front the task force.

As you might note from the latest Peter King missive from TheMMQB , the plans in place are not plans that are put together in two or three months. This was not a hasty decision by Governor Nixon. It is, in fact, a well thought out and planned, long time project by two advocates of the state of Missouri and the St. Louis region.

2) I’ve asked the state’s Attorney General to examine the law and determine if the Governor truly has the legal authority to issue public bonds without any legislative or voter approval. In the meantime, it is imperative we stop this proposal in its tracks. If not, we could see future administrations attempt to hijack funding authority from the people and their elected officials, creating a very slippery slope.

Question; why are you there? Don’t we elect officials to make these decisions for us? And where does your idea stop? If we’re all going to vote on each and every state expenditure, do we really need elected officials in Jefferson City? If we do as you propose, shouldn’t the people simply vote on every expenditure?

3) If this plan moves forward, we’d be allowing one individual to unilaterally put Missouri millions of dollars into debt.

In fact, the Rams provide a net financial BENEFIT for the state. While the state doesn’t realize any financial gain from building roads or parks (which I use and are necessary), the Rams, Chiefs, Royals, Cardinals and Blues and their opponents who play in Missouri all provide tax BENEFITS for the state. In fact, extending the bonds currently being used for America’s Center would be more beneficial for the state’s coffers than NOT extending them. The state expenditure is $12 million a year, and the overall income from player taxes, team employee taxes, visitors to the city on game weekends and taxes generated on game days exceed that number.

I appreciate your efforts in working in Missouri government and trying to advance the cause of the state. However, I don’t believe letting a pro sports franchise out the door does advance the cause of the state. And if you’re going to propose bills in the Senate, I would assume you would want to do so with some factual background, which I’m more than happy to help out with.

Feel free to get in touch with any questions or comments.

Sincerely,

Randy Karraker

The Fast Lane, 101 ESPN

randy@101espn.com

http://www.101sports.com/2015/03/03/letter-to-sen-silvey-re-bonds-for-an-nfl-stadium/

 

[bluecoconuts]

First, let me preface this by saying I'm aviation stupid.

Now, aren't flight paths altered semi-frequently. With the site being so close to the airport, it would seem like it would lead to extra traffic when this happens. Also, when planes have to circle before landing, wouldn't this bring more traffic to a closer site?

Again, be gentle. I know nothing about this stuff.

Honestly, I don't know details, but I've never had to circle or anything around LAX waiting to land, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen, but you'd have to imagine the circle would be much wider than 3 miles out, it's not like these planes can take turns that sharp, so (and just a guess) they'd probably rather them circle over the ocean, assuming weather allows it (which there's probably a better than 95% chance it does).

However wind direction does have final say over takeoff/landing direction, and there have been times that they have reversed it, but it's something they really dislike doing, only if there are extremely high winds would they do that, and it's more likely they'd have both landings and takeoffs done over the ocean than the city.

 

[RamFan503]

I heard the statement and I can tell you that you are taking it way out of context. Later Peacock was asked about potential local owners and he said he would speculate there are people locally that would be interested in buying the team but he hasn't had any discussions about such a thing.

Nonissue.

Didn't hear it so... good enough for me. I do think the reporter tried to convey it that way though. Good that Peacock isn't playing that game.

 

[LesBaker]

I hate that kind of talk personally, to me it seems like poking Kroenke. He's a private man, so if he's thinking about selling would he want that out there? And if he's not thinking about selling and its a shot about forcing the team away from him, that might make him mad because its a bit of a threat.

I'd bet he doesn't give a rats azz what anyone in govt or media says about him. I'd bet BIG coin on that.

 

[RamFan503]

Don't they have to alter flight patterns near a few stadiums during football games? And shouldn't the FAA be the ones coming up with these reports - not a rival in the great stadium race?

 

[RamBill]

The Head of the STL Stadium Task Force, Dave Peacock, joins Randy Karraker and D’Marco Farr on the The Fast Lane

Listen to Peacock Interview

 

[bluecoconuts]

Don't they have to alter flight patterns near a few stadiums during football games? And shouldn't the FAA be the ones coming up with these reports - not a rival in the great stadium race?

I think I heard the Eagles have to, but I'm not sure, there's probably a few. I know there's a flight path that goes right over the 49ers stadium, but if they changed it or not, I don't know.

 

[RhodyRams]

Don't they have to alter flight patterns near a few stadiums during football games? And shouldn't the FAA be the ones coming up with these reports - not a rival in the great stadium race?

LaGuardia comes to mind...not 100% sure tho

 

[CodeMonkey]

I'd bet he doesn't give a rats azz what anyone in govt or media says about him. I'd bet BIG coin on that.

Yea but did you know he's trademarked 9 variations of his name including "Silent Stan", "Stan the Man" (litigation pending) and "Smoovey Smoove"?

 

[BuiltRamTough]

AEG plays the terrorism card to boost its NFL bid
To the editor: It is shocking that sports and entertainment firm AEG, in its lust for an NFL team, would hire Tom Ridge, a former Homeland Security secretary, to play the terrorism card. ("AEG report warns rival Inglewood NFL stadium presents terrorist threat," Feb. 27)

Perhaps the group behind the football stadium development in Inglewood should in turn hire the firm Chicken Little and Associates to report that a "dirty bomb" would more likely be detonated in a dense population zone like the downtown AEG site. Then they might start rumors that attempts to purchase yellow cake were made at various downtown bakeries.

Actually, I cannot imagine the NFL finds this at all amusing. With this absurd terrorism alert released through a third party, AEG was clearly trying to ring the bell that can't be unrung. I believe the NFL should investigate AEG with the possibility of disqualifying it from consideration of ever hosting an NFL team.

Robert Fox, Los Angeles

..

To the editor: This is a case of taking an idea and assuming the absolute worst. By raising fears that the Inglewood site's proximity to Los Angeles International Airport would make it susceptible to a plane crash, the report assumes that nobody in the control towers or the cockpit would be doing his or her job.

If Inglewood is unsafe, then the Forum has been unsafe for more than 40 years. Yankee Stadium, Met Life Stadium, Citi Field and the National Tennis Center in New York have been unsafe for all these years. The list goes on.

For that matter, the White House and U.S. Capitol are near the flight paths for Washington's Reagan National Airport; should we shut those government facilities down too?

This is simply taking the idea of what's safe entirely too far and assuming the public can't see through the obvious self-interest of a developer.

Bob Previdi, Philadelphia

..

To the editor: Really? The Times gives Saturday's top story placement to a blatant fear-mongering report commissioned by a direct business competitor to the Inglewood stadium proposal — and then barely touches on such baldfaced self-interest and dealing by AEG and other backers of a downtown NFL stadium?

I'm not a football fan and really have no horse in this race, but I say full speed ahead to Inglewood.

Ged Kenslea, North Hollywood

..

To the editor: How pitiful it is to read about a preposterous report designed solely to harm a business rival of AEG. And how sad to see that Ridge has stooped to collecting paychecks by ringing imagined terror alarms, custom tailored, for a price.

Ridge and AEG should be ashamed of themselves and issue an apology to every L.A.-area homeowner and business owner who happens to live under the flight paths of airplanes.

Jim Regan, Carlsbad, Calif.

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook

Copyright © 2015, Los Angeles Times

 

[Thordaddy]

While I diagree with your reading on constructive evicition as applied to this situation, I do agree that the current tenancy by the rams is based upon their desire not to move immediately and that the failure of the CVC to upgrade the dome now gives the Rams the power to end the lease EVERY year, thus the tenancy this year was purely up to and done by the Rams. I will also say that the CVC has no way to force or keep the rams renewing that lease in the future and the Rams are under no obligation to do so. I do believe though, every year they renew the lease they are obligated to stay and do NOT have grounds to break that yearly lease (i.e. they can not currently move in 2015, 2016 is fully up to them though)


I want to be clear where my issue is on this, the arguments put forth on constructive eviction or a broken contract (broken promise) are legal actions that would be intiated by the party at any time to end a lease. Thesee would be outside actions not speciifed by the contract (the arbitration - the timeline for it, the way it was done, and the results of it were all part of the lease agreement). That would be the Rams going to a court and filing an action (note the arbitration was NOT a court action) and they could file such actions at any time if they had the grounds for it. They would not go through the lease designed system as they did.
I can't figure out why people are going down the broken contract/constructive eviction path since the Rams themselves have NOT - is the goal 1) to claim the Rams could break the 1 year lease they just signed and move in 2015; or 2) are you trying to make the CVC into the "Bad guy" such that the Rams are rightfully moving in the future (which I do not feel is correct - neither side CVC or Rams is good or bad in the current situation, both sides are businesses making desicions based upon option that are provided for in a contract - no one is breaking the contracts rules).

Well drac in the end this here iz why half the lawyers lose every case adjudicated, let me say this, my friends tell me I'm not always right but I am seldom uncertain Q SARAH

 

[8to12]

There's only really three flight paths that I know of that go over the site, going off the map, Chicago and St Louis go right over it, and Washington DC somewhat goes over the corner and even then it's hard to tell if it does or just skims by it. I believe the corner is where the stadium would be. NY is close, but it doesn't go over the site.

You have to keep in mind, flights take off to the west and land from the east, so they just have incoming flights to worry about, and even then there's not that much, no more than AEG would have. The noise from the planes is just a stupid idea, should Carson be worried because of freeway noise? Staples is in the middle of downtown LA, they don't have noise pollution? Nope, because there's 19,000 fans inside screaming, nobody can hear crap. Carson and Inglewood wont be able to hear planes or cars or anything passing by, especially if Inglewood has a retractable roof.

To clear things up regarding this map.... It's purpose is to show the number of different cities that fly in and out of LAX. It is not the actual flight path of the arriving flights. They follow 1 of two paths coming in from the east. There are 2 run ways approx 5/8 of a mile apart, or the distance from Century Blvd to Manchester Blvd. The path of the south runway runs just south of the Hollywood park property, while the runway to the north runs just about where the Forum is on Manchester Blvd. The Stadium location sits to the north side of the property, overlapping onto the 60 acres that Kroenke purchased, just south of the Forum. I don't know for a fact, but it is my opinion the flight paths will be close but not directly over the stadium.
I grew up in north Orange County... on the LA county boarder, and we were under the flight path. On summer nights you could sit on the porch and see the planes coming from the east like one big continuous parade.

 

[RamFan503]

I'd bet he doesn't give a rats azz what anyone in govt or media says about him. I'd bet BIG coin on that.

I don't know man. People almost want to put less than human traits to guys like Stan. Yeah I'm sure he has a thick skin but I bet things get to him to an extent. I don't think he makes those statements he did when he bought the Rams if he didn't. You may be right in that he doesn't care what the gov't or media thinks about him but what they say in regards to public perception I think still matters to him. Not enough to change his strategy but I bet it still matters.

 

[RamBill]

Peter King's Mailbag

http://mmqb.si.com/2015/03/04/lesean-mccoy-kiko-alonso-bills-eagles-trade-nfl/print/

ON LONDON AND THE NFL. A lot of The MMQB the past few weeks has been dedicated to discussing possible situations in which the Chargers, Rams, and Raiders may or may not change location. With the NFL also open about wanting a franchise in London, how does the play for L.A. affect any plans or desires the NFL has for moving a franchise to London?

—Chris N., Waltham, Mass.

That is a great question. It is a question that is on the minds of expansion-minded executives and owners in the league as well. I believe St. Louis must move quickly if owner Stan Kroenke moves the team to Los Angeles. I believe if St. Louis delays its efforts to seek the team or teams that lose the bid for Los Angeles, London in a couple of years would become a viable alternative. I was impressed with the intensity of the St. Louis group, although even those executives know it may be too late to keep the Rams. They are going to have to maintain that intensity to make sure they get one of the teams left jilted after the Los Angeles situation has been solved.

ON L.A. AND THE NFL. Don’t you think the NFL and its owners love hanging LA over the head of any city that dares not build their team a stadium? How many teams over the past two decades have used LA as a pawn?

—Eric, Cincinnati

Not as many as you think. But you’re absolutely right. Los Angeles is the leverage that the NFL needs in a city like St. Louis. And look what happened. The city and state were unwilling—and I certainly don’t blame them because of the public money needed—to make the Edward Jones Dome a top-flight NFL stadium. I think you’re absolutely onto something and it raises this interesting issue as well. What is the next Los Angeles? After this market is filled, could London be the next chess piece, the next city the NFL uses to force the next generation of stadium-needy teams to build or else?

ON REPLAY REVIEWS. Peter, you quoted Jeff Fisher saying, “So if someone throws a touchdown pass against us to win the game, I’m going to throw the challenge flag. Somebody [committed a holding penalty] out there. Somebody did something.” But doesn’t the coach need to specifically tell the official what they are challenging? So Fisher couldn’t just throw the flag and say “find something” to the official. He have to say, “No. 68 held No. 55 while he was rushing the QB,” or something like that. No?

—Matt N., Horsham, Pa.

Although a coach must tell the referee the call he is challenging, the rule now states that if there is another review-eligible foul on the play, that potential foul must also be reviewed. So in other words, if everything is reviewable—holding calls, pass interference, a defensive end jumping offside—then an offensive holding call would negate a winning touchdown under the proposal that anything is replay-reviewable.

ON TAXES AND TEAMS. It is truly amazing how much money people are willing to pay—either in new taxes or ticket prices or both—to get or keep an NFL team. Why does the NFL and rich owners continue to pile debt upon taxpayers, when they make a mega profit year after year? I wish the taxpayers of St Louis, San Diego, and Oakland the very best, but if they keep their teams, the reward will be increased taxes and high ticket costs. What a reward.

—Joe J., Raeford, N.C.

That is why some cities have simply said no. I applaud them. You are absolutely right. There’s no reason Stan Kroenke should get a tax break for keeping the Rams in St. Louis. No reason except one: There is another city willing to give him a sweetheart deal. That city is Inglewood, Calif. As one of the parties in this franchise-shift story told me the other day, “Stan Kroenke did not get rich without taking advantage of his options. What this is all about is creating attractive alternatives for him.” St. Louis has a choice. It can choose to let Kroenke leave and lose an NFL franchise. If that happens, there’s a chance, and maybe a good one, that the NFL will never return to St. Louis. To many in city governments and people in the area, that would be fine. But cities continue to believe there is a benefit, some of them direct and some indirect in having an NFL franchise. I see both sides, but more and more I believe the days of endless streams of public funding for rich owners are over.

 

[RamBill]

ST. LOUIS (KTVI) – New signs of growing momentum toward building a new riverfront football stadium and keeping the Rams in St. Louis emerged, Tuesday. A team source told FOX 2 that even with all the news about the Rams possibly moving to Los Angeles, ticket sales and season ticket renewals for 2015 were ahead of 2014. There was more news “hidden” in a new set of stadium renderings just released by the stadium task force, led by former Anheuser-Busch executive, Dave Peacock.

Watch Fox 2 Stadium Report

 

[blue4]

I don't know man. People almost want to put less than human traits to guys like Stan. Yeah I'm sure he has a thick skin but I bet things get to him to an extent. I don't think he makes those statements he did when he bought the Rams if he didn't. You may be right in that he doesn't care what the gov't or media thinks about him but what they say in regards to public perception I think still matters to him. Not enough to change his strategy but I bet it still matters.

It's not less than human traits, but it is an ability to distance one's self from what's going on, so to speak. It's how people can donate millions to a hospital, yet not blink an eye firing a division of people for an under performing 3rd quarter. I don't think you can get to Stan's level by caring when you step on toes.
This isn't intended as a criticism, it's not right or wrong, just something that is. One could even make an argument that without that kind of ability there'd be little progress. I'd bet money Stan didn't even listen to the interview.