New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[RamFan503]

San Diego is the 28th market. So STL is higher than them.

That is metro area only and non specific. The #8 might be off as I never verified the info in the article I saw here in this thread. But when talking NFL #s, the last published numbers have SD at 16 and St Louis at #27.
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2015/01/09/Media/NFL-local.aspx

All of this makes you wonder how they come up with the numbers. SD has a larger metro population yet StL has more TV sets? Two business journals have SD at #16 and #18 and StL at #27 and #28 in NFL specific analysis. But I still don't know how they really achieve their numbers. Not sure where the #8 came from and I'm not going back to look at it so I will concede that part.

I like how StL seems to stack up so that should bode well for the Lou. My real point is that the NFL is going to look at their bottom dollar. If StL stacks up well, then I can't see them abandoning that market. If however, what they are looking at has SD coming in as making them more money, I really don't think the fans will weigh on their decision as much as they should.

As far as football is concerned, you could pretty much lump the entire northern half of the state in with the Bay Area. I'm just talking from a football fan perspective.

 

[RamFan503]

Without getting into the whole "can you drive there" discussion again, I would say that the fans from SD are just as likely to find another team as the fans from St Louis. I don't know why we would be more likely to find another team than SD.

I totally agree you have to look at what makes the most money for the NFL. But I disagree that leaving two teams in rotten stadiums and an essential total abandonment of an entire market is the simplest and most efficient way to do that. 21st ain't as large as SD or LA but it ain't peanuts either. And no one has an answer for how the Chargers and Raiders are going to resolve their issues if the Rams move. That's 3 cities either abandoned with public money on the table or in shambles from a team relations standpoint. All for one guy. And that's it. One guy who doesn't actually have it bad already, who has plenty of options in his home market, and just wants to hang out with Jack Nicholson. To me, that seems to be the exact opposite of simple.

Assuming of course everyone has their financing, yada, yada.


I very much doubt the NFL cares about all the teams being located in the West. They don't care that the South teams are actually in the south why would they care about the West? They don't care that KC isn't in the actual west right now. They didn't care about it the first time they reorganized, and it's caused not one real problem. I can't see any owner really taking this into account. Maybe as a 5th tiebreaker or something. As for rivalries, location doesn't seem to hurt the Seattle/St Louis vibe now and it certainly didn't hurt the SF rivalry when we were good. Our poor performance hurt that.

Fair enough. I do think the rivalries would matter to them and it would be cleaner but I also agree that it may be fairly low on the top ten list of why to/not to move a team.

 

[RamFan503]

-sigh- to prove it he'd have to do something the NFL isn't going to do, nor does he want to.

Not sure why you're trying to compare the leases and situations but to each their own

Could do with out the -sigh- Just sayin'

 

[Big Willie]

Really? Didn't realize that. Assumed San Diego would've been a bigger market.

That said.... if the Chargers can't move to LA (Carson has nice new renderings but a lousy polluted site + it looks like Spanos has no interest in staying in San Diego), moving them to St. Louis would actually be a market upgrade. So if the Rams & Raiduhs move to LA, & the Bolts move to St. Louis, would everyone be happy? (the NFL + Cities + Teams) the Bolts would have a nice new stadium (next to the *ahem* Union Light & Power building), the Rams & Raiduhs would move in to a new stadium in a city where they have some history & fan support... the only losers would be Oakland and Carson.

Where does it all end. Today it's the glaze and glamor of LA. Tomorrow is it London? Or more likely, Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal? The whole concept of teams moving when there is fan and local financial support is atrocious, especially when the reason is an apparent money grab. Does anyone want the Bengals, Jaguars, Saints or other smaller markets to move simply for the appeal of more money and higher TV ratings. The NBA and NHL (to the U.S.)have gone after larger markets in North America. Who wants to see the St Louis Raiders play the Montreal Steelers or Vancouver Bengals? Does this relocation process create a scenario where other teams start moving like the last time the Rams moved? It should make all of at least think about the ramifications of the relocation decision and how the NFL will look in the future.

 

[RamFan503]

Where does it all end. Today it's the glaze and glamor of LA. Tomorrow is it London? Or more likely, Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal? The whole concept of teams moving when there is fan and local financial support is atrocious, especially when the reason is an apparent money grab. Does anyone want the Bengals, Jaguars, Saints or other smaller markets to move simply for the appeal of more money and higher TV ratings. The NBA and NHL (to the U.S.)have gone after larger markets in North America. Who wants to see the St Louis Raiders play the Montreal Steelers or Vancouver Bengals? Does this relocation process create a scenario where other teams start moving like the last time the Rams moved? It should make all of at least think about the ramifications of the relocation decision and how the NFL will look in the future.

Really well said. Is this getting lost on the power brokers in the NFL? At some point, market loyalty should amount to SOMETHING. I fear it does not.

 

[Big Willie]

Really well said. Is this getting lost on the power brokers in the NFL? At some point, market loyalty should amount to SOMETHING. I fear it does not.

Whether it's the Carson or Inglewood project that wins, the bar is being raised on the fan experience in the NFL. If I were an owner, you can rest assured that I would want a posh stadium built in honor of my team. It seems likely that several current owners whose leases are coming to an end are monitoring the process and strategizing how to get swanky new digs. And, as the old guard is replaced by new aggressive management, the new crew will find a way to get what they want.

 

[The Ripper]

That is metro area only and non specific. The #8 might be off as I never verified the info in the article I saw here in this thread. But when talking NFL #s, the last published numbers have SD at 16 and St Louis at #27.
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2015/01/09/Media/NFL-local.aspx

All of this makes you wonder how they come up with the numbers. SD has a larger metro population yet StL has more TV sets? Two business journals have SD at #16 and #18 and StL at #27 and #28 in NFL specific analysis. But I still don't know how they really achieve their numbers. Not sure where the #8 came from and I'm not going back to look at it so I will concede that part.

I like how StL seems to stack up so that should bode well for the Lou. My real point is that the NFL is going to look at their bottom dollar. If StL stacks up well, then I can't see them abandoning that market. If however, what they are looking at has SD coming in as making them more money, I really don't think the fans will weigh on their decision as much as they should.

As far as football is concerned, you could pretty much lump the entire northern half of the state in with the Bay Area. I'm just talking from a football fan perspective.

I have seen the 8 number for San Diego but it's used to describe the San Diego Tijuana conurbation

 

[blue4]

Where is the SD stadium proposal at now? Because if the Chargers accept a deal from SD it's pretty much over for St Louis no matter what we do. Unless of course the NFL acts to guide another team in our direction, but as far as the Rams go....

 

[den-the-coach]

Whether it's the Carson or Inglewood project that wins, the bar is being raised on the fan experience in the NFL. If I were an owner, you can rest assured that I would want a posh stadium built in honor of my team.

Or you could build it yourself without any public money whatsoever!

 

[The Ripper]

Where is the SD stadium proposal at now? Because if the Chargers accept a deal from SD it's pretty much over for St Louis no matter what we do. Unless of course the NFL acts to guide another team in our direction, but as far as the Rams go....

Or you could build it yourself without any public money whatsoever!

If St Louis has secured the financing the NFL will help either through relocation or expansion. Nixon used Cleveland as an example of hope for St Louis. Goodell was a key player in the deal so I could see that as the alternate plan

 

[blue4]

Or you could build it yourself without any public money whatsoever!

Where's the fun in that?

 

[OldSchool]

San Diego according to every source I can find is bigger than St Louis in both city and metro populations and it's listed in each as having a higher growth rate.

http://www.iweblists.com/us/population/MetropolitanStatisticalAreaPop.html

According to that site Tampa and Denver will pas St Louis soon. It's also interesting to note on that site that San Jose isn't listed with San Francisco and Oakland yet the city Levi Stadium is in is in the San Jose group. So technically you should include it with SF/Oak which would technically put them at #4. Also in a lot of these San Bernadino is not counted in the LA area nor is Oxnard, which is why some of these sites will show LA at only 13+ million instead of the 16-17 million range we generally see for them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_areas_of_the_United_States

http://www.citypopulation.de/php/usa-metro.php

 

[RMFN]

Really well said. Is this getting lost on the power brokers in the NFL? At some point, market loyalty should amount to SOMETHING. I fear it does not.

I'm afraid market loyalty went away in the 70's when Irsay took the Colts from Baltimore to Ind. These owners only care about the money. I feel that even Jerry Jones would move if he was given the right amount of money. These owners care NOTHING about the the fans. It's all about the money and nobody could convince me otherwise.

I lived thru the Colts move to Ind and the Cards move to Ariz. I gave these and the Rams my hard earn money supporting these teams. If the Rams move I'm done shelling out money to owners who could care less about me as a fan. I've had season ticket to teams since the mid 70's and I've had enough. I'll be done with them.

I'll just play fantasy football.

 

[den-the-coach]

Where's the fun in that?

 

[OldSchool]

I'm afraid market loyalty went away in the 70's when Irsay took the Colts from Baltimore to Ind. These owners only care about the money. I feel that even Jerry Jones would move if he was given the right amount of money. These owners care NOTHING about the the fans. It's all about the money and nobody could convince me otherwise.

I lived thru the Colts move to Ind and the Cards move to Ariz. I gave these and the Rams my hard earn money supporting these teams. If the Rams move I'm done shelling out money to owners who could care less about me as a fan. I've had season ticket to teams since the mid 70's and I've had enough. I'll be done with them.

I'll just play fantasy football.

Agree even along with that the Browns were beloved in Cleveland and had one of if not the most passionate fan bases and the NFL abandoned them. Anything is possible in business.

 

[Big Willie]

Agree even along with that the Browns were beloved in Cleveland and had one of if not the most passionate fan bases and the NFL abandoned them. Anything is possible in business.

True story!

 

[iced]

I'm afraid market loyalty went away in the 70's when Irsay took the Colts from Baltimore to Ind. These owners only care about the money. I feel that even Jerry Jones would move if he was given the right amount of money. These owners care NOTHING about the the fans. It's all about the money and nobody could convince me otherwise.

I lived thru the Colts move to Ind and the Cards move to Ariz. I gave these and the Rams my hard earn money supporting these teams. If the Rams move I'm done shelling out money to owners who could care less about me as a fan. I've had season ticket to teams since the mid 70's and I've had enough. I'll be done with them.

I'll just play fantasy football.

I 100% agree with you - and it always baffles me when some fans try to posture their ego at one another for not staying with a team after it moves... "You're not a real fan!!!" . Uh no I'm just a loyal to the owner as he is to us.

 

[RamzFanz]

Dallas played in Texas stadium for 37 years. Saint Louis will have 2 stadiums in 25 years. How in the world can the NFL even think of abandoning that kind of support?!

I feel that even Jerry Jones would move if he was given the right amount of money.

While I agree with your post, I don't think he would ever leave Dallas. He owns football in Texas and Texas is probably the best place to have a football team.

 

[Big Willie]

Or you could build it yourself without any public money whatsoever!

I heard Dave Peacock say something on an interview with 101ESPN. I am paraphrasing, but it goes something like this....the $millions teams use to pay for their portion of stadiums can actually be financed against the revenue generated by the new stadiums so that no money actually comes out of the pockets of the owners. I hadn't thought about it before I heard him say that, but it makes perfect sense.

So, if they can do that in publically funded stadiums surely they can do that in privately funded stadiums. If an team owns the land, pays no rent, can generate revenue from concerts, host lush Hollywood events, charge large amounts for PSLs, Luxury suites, sponsorships, and etc., it would seem that a sharp business person could keep the financed amount to a minimum (let's just say for argument it's a fourth of the stadium cost or $450 million). Throw in a market that has lots of millionaires and has been without a team for 20 years and you have a no lose proposition. SK is a sharp business man and knows how to make money while keeping the money he already has in hand. Not all NFL owners are as sharp as he is, most can't afford to finance half a billion dollars, and not all markets are as lucrative as LA. With one team in LA a stadium can be built with no public money, if you have great borrowing power and great business acumen.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Whether it's the Carson or Inglewood project that wins, the bar is being raised on the fan experience in the NFL. If I were an owner, you can rest assured that I would want a posh stadium built in honor of my team. It seems likely that several current owners whose leases are coming to an end are monitoring the process and strategizing how to get swanky new digs. And, as the old guard is replaced by new aggressive management, the new crew will find a way to get what they want.

That's what worries me, new owners who are thinking "I want a big top of the line stadium like Inglewood, but what if my city says no and offers something less than that? If we say no to the Rams leaving, then I might be stuck, even if another city offers me up something better...."

Who knows how they are thinking, but if they're thinking that, it might be hard to convince them to say no.