New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[RamFan503]

While agree with the Rams on the side on arbitration, I don't think they were able to address the main point - where they would play the interim...

and as i said, why its a shame they never had peacock and blitz ahead of time..

that's like knowing the poor drafts and coaching from devaney, zygmunt, linehan, etc. for all the horrible drafts slamming snead and fisher for the poor product on the field..

yea the history sucks - but last i checked they havent left yet, and the relocation guidelines still apply..

i really can't wait to see how this plays out and the domino effect its going to have - essentially you're arguing that if the city didn't meet the NFL stadium criteria on the first try they're free to leave no matter what changes a city comes up with..

If it happens, watch that argument be used

That might apply if they actually did try to come up with something. But as you even have admitted, the CVC plan was not a serious attempt toward solving the issue. And that was presented in 2012 - not after the decision but before.

 

[RamFan503]

The Stub Hub seating of 27,000 is for soccer matches. In football configuration, an additional 12,000 temporary seats can be installed. this was done when the Chargers had pre-season games here when it was called the"Home Depot Center". (Bleachers in the end zones and club seating on the field). Trying to get a print-out put up so you can see soccer seating vs football seating. Football field isn't as big as a soccer field. they could put up 40,000 for a football game. Still small, but if you were only needing it for a year or two.....

Good points. Still not sure how that equates to LA being done right but 40k is way better than 27k.

 

[The Ripper]

The real question, is why did Nixon wait till after the elections last year were over to announce the task force?

 

[blue4]

The real question, is why did Nixon wait till after the elections last year were over to announce the task force?

Middle Missouri is anti government. It doesn't matter the issue. God and guns.

 

[blue4]

But that is not really what is at play here. The US is a representative republic and not a democracy. But that doesn't matter when the voters pass an initiative or ordinance or whatever. The criteria is there. A republic has many issues decided by a simple majority as in a true democracy.

But just because you elect representatives, that doesn't mean the public doesn't get a say beyond that. The very idea of a representative republic is that the citizens still have checks to hold their representatives accountable and also be able to put something into affect when they feel their representatives are not willing or able to do so.

No - the voters don't have to wait until the next election to maybe cast aside enough politicians to get their will. In many cases, their best course of action is to pass an initiative or measure that is specifically designed to carry out their will when politicians are being politicians or simply don't have the will to do so. To go against that is very contrary to the representative republic concept on which this nation (the oldest current government in existence) was founded.

This is what I have a problem with no matter what the issue. So just because I may want the Rams to stay in St Louis, I don't find the suit to disregard what the voters wanted as a good thing.

The only people that seem to be really complaining do not live in St Louis.

 

[blue4]

So you wait until the team can go year to year before you formalize a plan and then you claim you have no time? Seriously? If you are so worried that you wouldn't get elected if you supported such a notion, what does that say about the notion? I'm having a real disconnect here.

Because voting for a stadium before it's really needed when the bridge you drive across every day is bad, your job is in peril, and you need a new high school isn't a good thing in pretty much everywhere in America. I would be glad to let this go if one person can provide me with just one example of a city, its residents, and it's county and state governments working harmoniously towards a new stadium years before it's really required. A stadium that is younger than 20 years old. It's one thing to speculate about how the NFL views it. There going to do what they want regardless, view thing how ever they need to in order to get the result they want. It's another to actually criticize the city for not being able to achieve something unrealistic to achieve. It's not fair to insinuate that because a vote in St Louis might have failed that this is some justification that St Louis should lose the team, when everyone else's own city wouldn't have made the grade either. It's unfair for a California resident to criticize us for having a spot of trouble doing something their own governments were unable to get done after the Rams left. Building a new stadium without a committed team is hard, they of all people should know that.

There are no protests to replace the mayor. There was worse resistance from ballpark village. So, we should return to trying to predict what the NFL will do, and maybe let us residents worry if it seems too slimy. I'm not saying this to pick any kind of fight, or to challenge anyone. It just seems to be getting to the stage of the old
"splinter in your eye, but the plank is in mine" around here.

 

[rams2050]

I don't know; if you elect alderman, senators and representatives who pass this type of ordinance/legislation which removes the voters from having a say in the process, if that is, indeed, what the judge ultimately decides, then isn't that part and parcel of our current democratic process? I mean the voters are the ones who put these folks in office to pass those types of things, and it IS a representative government.

Maybe the day will come when voters can vote on every little thing vis a vis their smartphones or computer app but that day has yet to come. Until then we are stuck with what we've voted into office.

I'm with blue4; I'm from St. Louis but live in mid-Missouri and you never hear anyone -- other that Professor Amman and his cronies, some of whom are on the public dole, I hope you realize, which means that they aren't currently paying taxes -- saying that they don't want the stadium or that they want the Rams to leave. I think Missourians are okay with what is going on when it comes to keeping the Rams there; that is, other than Amman, the 3 folks who signed on to his ill-founded attempt to latch onto the court process yesterday, and those 6 idiot representatives -- the latter of whom have been pretty roundly vilified in most quarters within the state.

 

[blue4]

Good Lord don't mention him by name or the torches come out.

 

[OldSchool]

Good Lord don't mention him by name or the torches come out.

Lol drama play much? No but what would likely be said, and rightfully so. Is that's just speculation and there's no proof that he'd been working on it that long without any proof.

 

[Big Willie]

Because voting for a stadium before it's really needed when the bridge you drive across every day is bad, your job is in peril, and you need a new high school isn't a good thing in pretty much everywhere in America. I would be glad to let this go if one person can provide me with just one example of a city, its residents, and it's county and state governments working harmoniously towards a new stadium years before it's really required. A stadium that is younger than 20 years old. It's one thing to speculate about how the NFL views it. There going to do what they want regardless, view thing how ever they need to in order to get the result they want. It's another to actually criticize the city for not being able to achieve something unrealistic to achieve. It's not fair to insinuate that because a vote in St Louis might have failed that this is some justification that St Louis should lose the team, when everyone else's own city wouldn't have made the grade either. It's unfair for a California resident to criticize us for having a spot of trouble doing something their own governments were unable to get done after the Rams left. Building a new stadium without a committed team is hard, they of all people should know that.

There are no protests to replace the mayor. There was worse resistance from ballpark village. So, we should return to trying to predict what the NFL will do, and maybe let us residents worry if it seems too slimy. I'm not saying this to pick any kind of fight, or to challenge anyone. It just seems to be getting to the stage of the old
"splinter in your eye, but the plank is in mine" around here.

Also, almost nothing gets done today politically until the last minute, or until there is a hard and fast impending deadline. Procrastination and last minute negotiation are the norm in these circles. This has been consistent in a number of NFL cities (see Minnesota) too. The challenge for St Louis, unlike cities where the teams have been there since their inception, is the perceived lack of commitment of the ownership. (We can only speculate there is no commitment by ownership as SK has not said two words for or against the area. Also, while we all believe SK's actions aren't negotiation tactics, this too is speculation based on his level of communication to media.) Everyone knew the baseball Cardinal were committed to the area and we're going to stay within the St Louis metro area.

In other words, how likely is the prospect of Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Dallas, NYG, NYJ, etc. moving if their leases go to year-to-year? Sure, there is that possibility, but the chances are less tan 20 percent unless a new ownership group takes over and is only concerned about maximizing their profitability. This is an NFL issue, because today financial nirvana resides in LA. Tomorrow, the destination could be Mexico City, Montreal, or Toronto (not to mention London or Paris)....all because some state official couldn't figure out how to build a new stadium for a money grubbing owner. Can you say, Toronto Jaguars, Montreal Buccaneers or Mexico City Steelers? (All of these are larger cities than the cities they would replace and all are within our time zones....While not likely...never say never.)

 

[snackdaddy]

Well, they play games in London. Seems to me the NFL is at least considering adding out of country markets to their brand. I could happen one day.

 

[RamFan503]

Because voting for a stadium before it's really needed when the bridge you drive across every day is bad, your job is in peril, and you need a new high school isn't a good thing in pretty much everywhere in America. I would be glad to let this go if one person can provide me with just one example of a city, its residents, and it's county and state governments working harmoniously towards a new stadium years before it's really required. A stadium that is younger than 20 years old. It's one thing to speculate about how the NFL views it. There going to do what they want regardless, view thing how ever they need to in order to get the result they want. It's another to actually criticize the city for not being able to achieve something unrealistic to achieve. It's not fair to insinuate that because a vote in St Louis might have failed that this is some justification that St Louis should lose the team, when everyone else's own city wouldn't have made the grade either. It's unfair for a California resident to criticize us for having a spot of trouble doing something their own governments were unable to get done after the Rams left. Building a new stadium without a committed team is hard, they of all people should know that.

There are no protests to replace the mayor. There was worse resistance from ballpark village. So, we should return to trying to predict what the NFL will do, and maybe let us residents worry if it seems too slimy. I'm not saying this to pick any kind of fight, or to challenge anyone. It just seems to be getting to the stage of the old
"splinter in your eye, but the plank is in mine" around here.

Very good response. Thanks for that.

For the record - I'm not a CA resident and I was involved in politics revolving around arrogant government officials going against the stated will of the voters so I'm a bit tainted by the crap I've seen happen. I may be letting that get in the way here.

 

[RamFan503]

Good Lord don't mention him by name or the torches come out.

Could be wrong but I think he's referring to bern bern. Mr. Peacock seems to be pretty well regarded even by those wanting the Rams to move back to LA.

 

[RamFan503]

Guess I didn't get the sarcasm of your earlier post. I'm a little groggy this morning.

 

[RamFan503]

But why do you want to run over pedestrians? Bicyclists I can understand but...