New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[bluecoconuts]

So...what's going on with that San Andreas Fault line?...any chance Cali falls into the ocean sometime between now and...say...the relocation deadline. just trying to get us back on track.

Its great, imagine all the extra fans that'll want to watch a game on the new island of Southern California, money maker.

 

[Rmfnlt]

Its great, imagine all the extra fans that'll want to watch a game on the new island of Southern California, money maker.

Too bad you'll be in STL.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Too bad you'll be in STL.

Hopefully I'll be in Switzerland, with Hawaii as my second choice! But I'll always have property in Maryland Heights as a fallback.

 

[den-the-coach]

Just a small town girl, livin a lonely world...

Just a city boy
Born and raised in south Detroit

 

[IowaRam]

Didn't see this posted . if it was , sorry for the repeat

Video of Inglewood presentation

Skip ahead to about the 2 hr 30 min mark

http://www.cityofinglewood.org/soc15.html

Well if the Rams DON'T move to Inglewood , the Inglewood High School is going to have one hell of a football stadium

 

[Moostache]

I am unimpressed by that Inglewood presentation, and surprisingly (at least to me) not entirely because I am an STL homer.

First off, that guy giving the presentation was GOD AWFUL...I have seen High School kids do better, in fact my 17 year old daughter is twice as good at public presentations as that guy. Really bush league to have such a schlep giving the narration and presenting. I am assuming he was NOT the guy they let talk to the NFL in NYC...

Secondly, Olympics? Really? When, 2032? There will not be another USA-hosted Olympics for 50 years if Boston ends up winning the bid for 2024. A bit unbelievable to think the IOC would grant a THIRD games to L.A., but whatever...just caught me a little off guard to see the "benefits" being touted for the Inglewood stadium including an Olympics.

Third, FIFA WC and Super Bowls. 1) FIFA WC is NOT coming back to the USA anytime soon and 2) Super Bowls are not exactly money makers for the host city any longer, just go ask the people of Indianapolis and Phoenix about it.

Last, the design does not speak of "cost certainty" nor lend itself to easy construction cost controls. That thing has $2.5-3.0B in total costs written all over it. And that's BEFORE getting hit with another $500M in relocation fees. Kroenke would have to have some serious under the table investors and kick backs from the NFL to make that worth more than a new stadium and either a hold or sell of the Rams beyond 2020.

If the NFL actually abandons the St. Louis market for THAT...and simultaneously hamstrings Oakland and San Diego in the process, the aftershocks will rattle the league to its core. I know I am a homer, but I simply don't see that Inglewood proposal as being anywhere NEAR overwhelming or a slam dunk...more like a missed dunk off the rim hoping for a follow up or a foul call.

 

[ChrisW]

Third, FIFA WC and Super Bowls. 1) FIFA WC is NOT coming back to the USA anytime soon and 2) Super Bowls are not exactly money makers for the host city any longer, just go ask the people of Indianapolis and Phoenix about it.

I gotta disagree about WC's. I hope that's what the new STL stadium will help bring. With the 2022 World Cup being in Qatar. They are using slave labor to build stadiums. They also had to move it to the winter because of the climate (desert). There's a growing movement to boycott that World Cup because of the working conditions of the slaves. There's also a hubbub about TV contracts, but that's another story.

It's becoming an option that the 2022 World Cup be moved to the US, because we are one of the few countries that already has the infrastructure in place. If we don't get the 2022, we are the favorites for the 2026 World Cup.

 

[bluecoconuts]

First off, that guy giving the presentation was GOD AWFUL...I have seen High School kids do better, in fact my 17 year old daughter is twice as good at public presentations as that guy. Really bush league to have such a schlep giving the narration and presenting. I am assuming he was NOT the guy they let talk to the NFL in NYC...

I don't see the issue with the presentation, it was pretty typical, he just moved along quickly understanding his audience. I'm going to say the guy knows what he's doing. I've given different presentations, and the same one has changed depending on who I'm giving it to. Either way, I don't see what was wrong with it, and even if there was it's not like that has anything to do with Inglewood.

Secondly, Olympics? Really? When, 2032? There will not be another USA-hosted Olympics for 50 years if Boston ends up winning the bid for 2024. A bit unbelievable to think the IOC would grant a THIRD games to L.A., but whatever...just caught me a little off guard to see the "benefits" being touted for the Inglewood stadium including an Olympics.

LA was on the shortlist for the US city, but in all honestly it's probably going to Rome or Hamburg, and I'm sure they know that. If Boston did get it, then it's not exactly a big deal for them to lose it, but Boston faces an uphill battle anyway. LA has ran some very successful Olympics though, especially in 84 where they helped bring back American interest in hosting the games, so I don't think the IOC would be that against giving them the games for the third time.

Third, FIFA WC and Super Bowls. 1) FIFA WC is NOT coming back to the USA anytime soon and 2) Super Bowls are not exactly money makers for the host city any longer, just go ask the people of Indianapolis and Phoenix about it.

World Cup could be played in the US again, but if they didn't, again not a big deal. Super Bowls are more about prestige that anything else. I don't think it's much of a surprise that LA would probably host multiple Super Bowls with Inglewood built.

None of the above really mean much in the development of the stadium though, wont effect the NFL's decision to select the site or not.

Last, the design does not speak of "cost certainty" nor lend itself to easy construction cost controls. That thing has $2.5-3.0B in total costs written all over it. And that's BEFORE getting hit with another $500M in relocation fees. Kroenke would have to have some serious under the table investors and kick backs from the NFL to make that worth more than a new stadium and either a hold or sell of the Rams beyond 2020.

You lose me here. First where are you seeing 2.5-3 billion for the stadium? Second there's been talks that LA is more about prestige as well as setting up things for his family, rather than trying to flip the Rams around to sell them. Kroenke has more money than he'd be able to spend, so I don't think the costs are a huge deal to him, otherwise he wouldn't be getting involved.

If the NFL actually abandons the St. Louis market for THAT...and simultaneously hamstrings Oakland and San Diego in the process, the aftershocks will rattle the league to its core. I know I am a homer, but I simply don't see that Inglewood proposal as being anywhere NEAR overwhelming or a slam dunk...more like a missed dunk off the rim hoping for a follow up or a foul call.

You also lose me here, Inglewood doesn't hamstring Oakland or San Diego, if anything it makes their threats have more legitimacy, especially given different issues in Carson and the fact that their cities have both dismissed that option as more of a bluff than anything else. There's also a lot of chatter from different reporters suggesting that the Raiders could go to St Louis if the Rams leave, with the Chargers going to Inglewood. If those cities are to retain their teams, it wont be because Inglewood fell through, if anything that gives them a better shot at keeping their cities, because if Inglewood falls through, then Carson has more time. The NFL isn't letting LA stay open anymore.

Inglewood is also an overwhelming slam dunk for the NFL because it's an owner doing all the work, paying for it all, they don't really have to do anything but let it happen. The biggest headache they have no is the emergence of Carson which makes them need to chose. Carson isn't near the slam dunk however (both from a logistical and a financial standpoint). The Rams moving to LA also sends far less shockwaves that rattle the NFL to the core than having to do a major realignment that is needed if the Raiders and Chargers team up.

That doesn't mean that Inglewood is going to happen, but it most certainly is a slam dunk for the NFL.

 

[beej]

I am unimpressed by that Inglewood presentation, and surprisingly (at least to me) not entirely because I am an STL homer.

First off, that guy giving the presentation was GOD AWFUL...I have seen High School kids do better, in fact my 17 year old daughter is twice as good at public presentations as that guy. Really bush league to have such a schlep giving the narration and presenting. I am assuming he was NOT the guy they let talk to the NFL in NYC...

Secondly, Olympics? Really? When, 2032? There will not be another USA-hosted Olympics for 50 years if Boston ends up winning the bid for 2024. A bit unbelievable to think the IOC would grant a THIRD games to L.A., but whatever...just caught me a little off guard to see the "benefits" being touted for the Inglewood stadium including an Olympics.

Third, FIFA WC and Super Bowls. 1) FIFA WC is NOT coming back to the USA anytime soon and 2) Super Bowls are not exactly money makers for the host city any longer, just go ask the people of Indianapolis and Phoenix about it.

Last, the design does not speak of "cost certainty" nor lend itself to easy construction cost controls. That thing has $2.5-3.0B in total costs written all over it. And that's BEFORE getting hit with another $500M in relocation fees. Kroenke would have to have some serious under the table investors and kick backs from the NFL to make that worth more than a new stadium and either a hold or sell of the Rams beyond 2020.

If the NFL actually abandons the St. Louis market for THAT...and simultaneously hamstrings Oakland and San Diego in the process, the aftershocks will rattle the league to its core. I know I am a homer, but I simply don't see that Inglewood proposal as being anywhere NEAR overwhelming or a slam dunk...more like a missed dunk off the rim hoping for a follow up or a foul call.

The stadium looks beautiful. But It looks hot in there. Like a greenhouse. I guess it's cooled in some way but they claim it's open all around so...

But man they are promising the moon. That guy said that on saturday dad's can play football on the field with their son??? He said it will be open all day everyday to go in and just sit??? Is he high, or does he just like how graffiti looks on the fifty yard line.
maybe I'm misunderstanding something.

The thing that aggravates me about that video is how smug those guys came off. What is it they have done besides letting Stan spend his money?

 

[beej]

The other thing I don't get is why they won't come right out and say the rams are moving to Inglewood. What's with the wink-wink-nod-nod thing?

 

[8to12]

I am unimpressed by that Inglewood presentation, and surprisingly (at least to me) not entirely because I am an STL homer.

First off, that guy giving the presentation was GOD AWFUL...I have seen High School kids do better, in fact my 17 year old daughter is twice as good at public presentations as that guy. Really bush league to have such a schlep giving the narration and presenting. I am assuming he was NOT the guy they let talk to the NFL in NYC...

Secondly, Olympics? Really? When, 2032? There will not be another USA-hosted Olympics for 50 years if Boston ends up winning the bid for 2024. A bit unbelievable to think the IOC would grant a THIRD games to L.A., but whatever...just caught me a little off guard to see the "benefits" being touted for the Inglewood stadium including an Olympics.

Third, FIFA WC and Super Bowls. 1) FIFA WC is NOT coming back to the USA anytime soon and 2) Super Bowls are not exactly money makers for the host city any longer, just go ask the people of Indianapolis and Phoenix about it.

Last, the design does not speak of "cost certainty" nor lend itself to easy construction cost controls. That thing has $2.5-3.0B in total costs written all over it. And that's BEFORE getting hit with another $500M in relocation fees. Kroenke would have to have some serious under the table investors and kick backs from the NFL to make that worth more than a new stadium and either a hold or sell of the Rams beyond 2020.

If the NFL actually abandons the St. Louis market for THAT...and simultaneously hamstrings Oakland and San Diego in the process, the aftershocks will rattle the league to its core. I know I am a homer, but I simply don't see that Inglewood proposal as being anywhere NEAR overwhelming or a slam dunk...more like a missed dunk off the rim hoping for a follow up or a foul call.

Wow, who pissed in your Cheerios? If you were listening, the presenter was one of the actual Architects from HKS. He is not a professional speaker. It was just a presentation to the members of the city of Inglewood ; it was not a presentation to the NFL.

And, Kroenke gets a no vote from the league because Spanos and Davis can't get stadiums built in their own markets?

 

[blue4]

Wow, who pissed in your Cheerios? If you were listening, the presenter was one of the actual Architects from HKS. He is not a professional speaker. It was just a presentation to the members of the city of Inglewood ; it was not a presentation to the NFL.

And, Kroenke gets a no vote from the league because Spanos and Davis can't get stadiums built in their own markets?

I don't think his speculation was anymore right or wrong than anyone else's.

 

[…..]

If the 49ers can move to San Jose I see no reason why the Raiders can't move to Fresno and end this madness.

 

[bluecoconuts]

The other thing I don't get is why they won't come right out and say the rams are moving to Inglewood. What's with the wink-wink-nod-nod thing?

Ticket sales, NFL wants them to play nice, so if Stan wants those yes votes, gotta play nice.

But man they are promising the moon. That guy said that on saturday dad's can play football on the field with their son??? He said it will be open all day everyday to go in and just sit??? Is he high, or does he just like how graffiti looks on the fifty yard line.
maybe I'm misunderstanding something.

I think they mean the park is open, there will be a certain amount you can go into the stadium, but then they will block you from going any further. Staples is like that.

I don't think his speculation was anymore right or wrong than anyone else's.

Mehhh, while its not wrong to have opinions and speculate about things, but at least backup things said. If you think the cost is going to go up to 2.5-3 billion, then explain why.

 

[blue4]

Ticket sales, NFL wants them to play nice, so if Stan wants those yes votes, gotta play nice.



I think they mean the park is open, there will be a certain amount you can go into the stadium, but then they will block you from going any further. Staples is like that.



Mehhh, while its not wrong to have opinions and speculate about things, but at least backup things said. If you think the cost is going to go up to 2.5-3 billion, then explain why.

He said it doesn't look like it lends itself to easy cost controls. It's about as plausible as assertions that Inglewood is a slam dunk or that the NFL isn't going to allow LA to be open anymore. The fact is that cost overruns are common and none of us have any real idea what the NFL’S views are.

 

[beej]

Ticket sales, NFL wants them to play nice, so if Stan wants those yes votes, gotta play nice.

why does he want good ticket sales in STL. The common consensus around seemed to be that Stan was actually trying to poison the well. Still doesn't make sense.

 

[Moostache]

Sorry...I see several questions about this, so I will clarify the cost overrun opinion a bit.

We have heard from the jump that the Inglewood proposal would be $1.7B, privately financed (which was almost immediately proven false, but never-mind all that for now), and that it would be "most amazing venue in sports". I simply look at the cost over-runs in Minnesota and Atlanta - two projects that are similarly shooting for garish and ostentatious ahead of functional and practical - and can see the costs of the LA venues - really whether its Carson OR Inglewood - rolling well past $2B with ease and settling in the $2.5-3.0B range.

Everything in California costs more to build than it does in Missouri as a comparable. Maybe Stan's boondoggle stadium would cost $1.7B in Missouri, but I just don't think that is a realistic projection in L.A. Making sure that design is earthquake-proof alone is likely to be a construction issue if your plan involves digging 100 feet into the ground, then I imagine the necessary reinforcements to prevent a potential tragedy in the event of an earthquake has to be significant, maybe that is already baked into the figures or maybe its not, I don't have special knowledge either way. And that is before you get into the usual suspects of graft, theft, mistakes, union chicanery, government red tape beyond initial approvals, etc.

If the first number presented is $1.7 B, then I don't think speculating on overruns of 30% is too crazy...maybe the $3.0 B top end as a worst case IS a bit high, but 30% overrun is about $2.25 B.

Anywho...just one man's opinion. Take it or leave it is all...
NONE of the proposed stadiums will come in under budget, construction projects of this magnitude never do...I just think the potential for things to get more costly faster are greatest in the area with the highest cost of construction and living.

 

[beej]

thinking about all of that got me to wondering about Busch Stadium. I was amazed at the cost of it. Estimated cost was 344 million. Finished cost 366 million. about 6% cost overrun. But I can't believe they got that built that cheap. I believe it was another 300 million for ballpark village.

 

[Sum1]

thinking about all of that got me to wondering about Busch Stadium. I was amazed at the cost of it. Estimated cost was 344 million. Finished cost 366 million. about 6% cost overrun. But I can't believe they got that built that cheap. I believe it was another 300 million for ballpark village.

It was also about 10 years ago. Though it would still be significantly cheaper than a football stadium it would be more than that today.

 

[IowaRam]

Kroenke has made a Bazillion dollars in real estate development , so I'm sure Kroenke has a slight understanding of cost over runs ,

I'm sure Kroenke and his team of experts have every cost figured out right down to the last cent , cost over runs , team relocations included