New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL
- Thread starter STL-Rams
- Start date
-
To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
- Status
All the other stuff aside for the moment, what do you think the chances of the Rams moving IF Carson makes it to the finish line and the NFL has to choose between the two projects and the three owners? I've had it at 60-40 the Rams leave for about 400 pages, wavered a bit to 55-45 at times. But assume for a moment that both projects are viable. By viable I mean SD and Oakland have failed and St Louis has succeeded with their plans. Otherwise, kinda pointless. I think it's going to be tough to not choose Carson. Simply because it keeps the ST Louis market, it fixes the Raiders enormous problems, and I think all the talk that's gone back and forth about things like urban development aren't nearly as important as some think. I don't think they care how much the Kroenke group will make from the Inglewood area and I don't think they care what surrounds Carson. I say that downgrades the Rams chances to 35-40% I do think that every day Carson hangs around it further weakens the Rams position.
Calculate all you want. Refer to the bottom right of the posts - right above the reply button. Game - set - match.
Funny thing is that I have to head out making beer deliveries in a few and I figured it would happen while I was gone. I just want to say that I am honored to have won this prestigious title and I will always remember you little people that were there for me to walk on in order to let it happen. I will think of you always as I drive off in my new 911 Turbo as you will be in my rear view mirror.
And I'd like to thank the Academy for... well... being the Academy even though I did all this on my own and they just put on this glitzy show.
Does my hair look good? I feel like I'm having a bad hair day. Oh never mind, I look fabulous anyway - as you all can see.
Anyway, I'd like to thank my family, the other mods here, Paulie for his ultimate vision that would allow my talents to be spotlighted as they have.... Oh... I'm sure I've forgotten someone.... Oh yes - Stan Kroenke - without whom NONE of this would have been possible. The CVC for being desperate pinheads; John Shaw for using his position on the stadium committee to make Martha Stewart and Hillary Clinton look like outsider traders. Dave Peacock for being too good of a guy for me to say anything negative about.... What? I'm out of time?
Thank you America and all ROD members.
Glad to see you're still humble through all of this.
Are we working on the assumption that Stan will capitulate and do what he's told?
Those have been the whispers that have been reported from his camp for a couple of months now, as opposed to pro-litigation
No, just how the NFL will decide. Whether or not he listens is another question all together.
bluecoconuts
Legend
Yeah, but those things aren't comparable... Just because they're both lawsuits, doesn't mean they're the same. That's like saying that murder and disturbing the peace are the same because they're both crimes.
The Ripper
Starter
Slay is not a party in the lawsuit. The Prof is asking to intervene which is not the same as removing a party to a lawsuit. The city attorney is the one defending the suit and Ammann wants to be able to defend the ordinance because of the mayors support. The city can't be removed from the suit.
Your confusing the suits. The 6 legislators sued Nixon and the Atty General is trying to have Nixon removed as a party to the suit.
The RSA vs St Louis is challenging the ordinance only
Which was never your original statement - you had said they had tried to had him removed as if it that was some sort of point of emphasis - I was pointing out St.Louis has done the same, only way more recently.
No you're confusing the argument - read above
New riverfront stadium costs crest $5 million
• By David Hunn
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_8782c5e3-ec4a-568d-846f-3700886f7dcb.html
ST. LOUIS • The cost of planning for a new riverfront stadium continues to rise.
This week, the tally climbed to more than $5 million, paid out by the public board that owns the Edward Jones Dome, on behalf of Gov. Jay Nixon's stadium task force.
Nixon’s two-man team announced plans for the $985 million open-air riverfront arena in January, days after St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke leaked his own plans to build a stadium in Los Angeles.
Since then, the task force has hired bond attorneys, construction managers, geotechnical engineers, financial advisers, surveyors and architects.
Local architecture firm HOK has made the most, over $4 million. The Dome authority's attorneys, at Blitz, Bardgett & Deutsch, have billed for almost $350,000. Thompson Coburn, which has supplied the effort with bond and financing lawyers, has charged $220,000 as of this week.
Bills were also recently released regarding land acquisition efforts. In February, the task force contracted with Downtown Now!, an arm of the downtown business association headed by former redevelopment banker Doug Woodruff, to tackle land acquisition.
The Dome authority is paying Downtown Now! $20,000 a month, plus expenses related to appraisals and title research. Woodruff pays expenses, plus $12,500 a month to developer Craig Heller to help negotiate land deals. Now!'s administrative fee is $7,500 a month.
As of this week, the authority has already sent Now! almost $70,000.
The task force also recently hired Darryl A. Piggee, for $5,000 a month, to help advance a workforce inclusion initiative, and Environmental Operations Inc., for $13,230, to complete the first phase of an environmental site assessment and identify grant or loan programs relating to site cleanup.
• By David Hunn
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_8782c5e3-ec4a-568d-846f-3700886f7dcb.html
ST. LOUIS • The cost of planning for a new riverfront stadium continues to rise.
This week, the tally climbed to more than $5 million, paid out by the public board that owns the Edward Jones Dome, on behalf of Gov. Jay Nixon's stadium task force.
Nixon’s two-man team announced plans for the $985 million open-air riverfront arena in January, days after St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke leaked his own plans to build a stadium in Los Angeles.
Since then, the task force has hired bond attorneys, construction managers, geotechnical engineers, financial advisers, surveyors and architects.
Local architecture firm HOK has made the most, over $4 million. The Dome authority's attorneys, at Blitz, Bardgett & Deutsch, have billed for almost $350,000. Thompson Coburn, which has supplied the effort with bond and financing lawyers, has charged $220,000 as of this week.
Bills were also recently released regarding land acquisition efforts. In February, the task force contracted with Downtown Now!, an arm of the downtown business association headed by former redevelopment banker Doug Woodruff, to tackle land acquisition.
The Dome authority is paying Downtown Now! $20,000 a month, plus expenses related to appraisals and title research. Woodruff pays expenses, plus $12,500 a month to developer Craig Heller to help negotiate land deals. Now!'s administrative fee is $7,500 a month.
As of this week, the authority has already sent Now! almost $70,000.
The task force also recently hired Darryl A. Piggee, for $5,000 a month, to help advance a workforce inclusion initiative, and Environmental Operations Inc., for $13,230, to complete the first phase of an environmental site assessment and identify grant or loan programs relating to site cleanup.
The Ripper
Starter
No, I am not. The city ordinance is the suit by the RSA and the mayor is not part of it. The city attorney is the one who defends the suit. The RSA DID NOT sue the mayor. The prof is not asking for anyone to be removed just for the opportunity to defend the ordinance. He can't remove the city from the suit. They have the right and obligation to defend the ordinance
bluecoconuts
Legend
It was a point of emphasis, you said that the claim couldn't be made that Chargers fans feel alienated or screwed over, and as evidence that is incorrect I offered the fact that San Diego Chargers fans feel so alienated and screwed over that they have sought legal action to remove Fabiani from negotiations because they feel he is both interfering with said negotiations, and because they feel his comments are often insulting to the city.
Saying that it can't be said that San Diego feel alienated or screwed over is wrong and saying that those lawsuits are in anyway similar is wrong as well.
bluecoconuts
Legend
Who knows? My guess is Inglewood still has the edge because of location, overall scope of project, and quickness of construction, but how that balances out compared to St Louis' efforts, I don't know. I'm still at 55-45 for the time being, so it's hard to really say. I don't think it's going to come down to any of the three trying to rally votes to block any project, it's going to be whichever the LA Committee decides. While friendships may play a small factor, I think it'll be based more on the projects, how well the team would likely handle the market, how easy it would be for the team to work a deal that the owner wants in their current markets, and efforts of current markets. Once they make their call the rest of the owners fill fall in line.
ramfaninsd
UDFA
- Status