Rams Stadium Negotiations

[JesusNEVERexisted]

And all of it, Peacock readily acknowledged, is contingent on Kroenke. The famously private owner has to agree to chip in - and keep the Rams in St.Louis.

Key words from the PD article. When Kroenke won't even talk to any state officials we already know he wants OUT and doesn't want to stay.

And recent history has shown St.Louis can't support an MLS team long term anyway. After a few years when the novelty wears off only maybe 10k to 12k would venture to that part of town to see soccer. Plus they forgot to mention WHERE is the billionaire MLS team owner? You all know, as crazy as it sounds, it takes a BILLIONAIRE to get into a league that no one watches on TV!

[not_a_wings_fan]

That's a pretty picture, but that's a really, really, really bad plan.

1.) that's too much money. Way too much.

2.) That's waaay too close to the river. That shit is going to flood repeatedly.

3.) the rams are leaving anyway - don't waste tax dollars and land.

[cardsfan04]

That's a pretty picture, but that's a really, really, really bad plan.

1.) that's too much money. Way too much.

2.) That's waaay too close to the river. That shit is going to flood repeatedly.

3.) the rams are leaving anyway - don't waste tax dollars and land.

1. I'm not going to disagree. I hate public funding. I also want an NFL team, so, eh. I will say that I like the way they structured the public funding though. The way they're trying to do it is much more palatable than how I thought they were going to do it.

2. They said they built it 3 feet higher than the peak of the 1993 flood which is apparently a once every 500 year event. Assuming they've done their research well, this should be a non-issue.

3. Yeah, they're probably gone. But, this would only happen if they agreed to stay. I think this had dual purpose though. It's probably a reasonable effort to keep the Rams, but I think this might have been a pitch to the NFL as much as it was to Kroenke. It was the city letting the NFL know that St. Louis is a viable NFL market, whether it be keeping the Rams or getting consideration for a new team.

[dmiles2186]

And recent history has shown St.Louis can't support an MLS team long term anyway. After a few years when the novelty wears off only maybe 10k to 12k would venture to that part of town to see soccer. Plus they forgot to mention WHERE is the billionaire MLS team owner? You all know, as crazy as it sounds, it takes a BILLIONAIRE to get into a league that no one watches on TV!

Could you kindly shut the (Frank) up, please?

[JesusNEVERexisted]

And recent history has shown St.Louis can't support an MLS team long term anyway. After a few years when the novelty wears off only maybe 10k to 12k would venture to that part of town to see soccer. Plus they forgot to mention WHERE is the billionaire MLS team owner? You all know, as crazy as it sounds, it takes a BILLIONAIRE to get into a league that no one watches on TV!

Could you kindly shut the (Frank) up, please?

The truth hurts doesn't it?

[JesusNEVERexisted]

That's a pretty picture, but that's a really, really, really bad plan.

1.) that's too much money. Way too much.

2.) That's waaay too close to the river. That shit is going to flood repeatedly.

3.) the rams are leaving anyway - don't waste tax dollars and land.

Yeah, on local radio people are already complaining about that location. Talk about a magnet for crime. Earth City is a MUCH better place for a stadium but our leaders keep shooting themselves in the foot!

It would be a miracle if the stadium even gets built. Still a lot of unanswered questions.

[dmiles2186]

And recent history has shown St.Louis can't support an MLS team long term anyway. After a few years when the novelty wears off only maybe 10k to 12k would venture to that part of town to see soccer. Plus they forgot to mention WHERE is the billionaire MLS team owner? You all know, as crazy as it sounds, it takes a BILLIONAIRE to get into a league that no one watches on TV!

Could you kindly shut the (Frank) up, please?

The truth hurts doesn't it?

No. What 'recent history' has shown that St. Louis can't support and MLS team long term? STL hasn't had a top level soccer team since back in the 70's and 80's and the NASL. They haven't had a chance to prove their worth at the top level. A lot of folks that I've talked to and have read on the interwebs say they won't support a soccer team (AC STL, FC STL) unless it's a top level team. I don't agree with that philosophy, but there are plenty of soccer fans in and around that area that they could make a run at it.

As for the owner, yes, no owner as of yet. But if the building is there, one of the hardest parts of fielding a team is solved. Just because there hasn't been a prospective owner doesn't mean there will never be one.

[JesusNEVERexisted]

If you've been listening to the local media over the years they all admit St.Louis is the hub as far as the birthplace of American soccer goes BUT some question how much passion really exists NOW to support an outdoor team. Remember the birthplace of American soccer here goes back to the 1950s but a LOT has changed since then!

For example in the early 80s the Steamers drew 18K day in and day out and even outdrew the BLUES for a few years! Yet St.Louis hasn't drawn 18K for an indoor soccer game in 30 years! I know St.Louis draws well for international friendlies but so do a LOT of cities. Remember watching nations play is a MUCH bigger draw than MLS.

I just don't see long term success here of 15K to 20K going to that part of town to see us play the Columbus Crew or Colorado Rapids or some other no name team. Current enthusiam for MLS in our area is overblown. They will have to prove the naysayers wrong by showing up near 20K for over 15+ years in a row IF we ever get a team.

[cprice12]

If you've been listening to the local media over the years....

That's all you had to say. Didn't read the rest.

[JesusNEVERexisted]

Put this in perspective. For those of you that were here in 1987 there was a plan for an 80,000 seat stadium in Earth City that actually had the support of local political officials and, most importantly, team owner Bill Bidwell yet it STILL didn't get built!

Also under this current stadium plan the city only owns 25% of the land needed to build it and 75% of the land is in private hands and they did NOT say how they will acquire that land!

[not_a_wings_fan]

This whole PSL thing is crazy. You alienate a huge portion of your potential fan base and makes seating even more unaffordable.

When they built the dome I was blown away by what they were asking for the PSL stuff...and you ended up with a disinterested fan base that's there to be seen rather than any sort of team spirit. It's a fail model.

I don't believe their flood projections. I'm sorry, I was there in 1993 and saw what happened. All they have done since is raise levies around the city, so when it floods again, and it will, the water will be even deeper in downtown. Believe it or don't, it's still foolish to build it in the proposed site.

Regardless of all that, there just isn't the money to be split between the Blues, Cards, and Rams. There's just too much cost involved for the corporate support...support that isn't even there in the numbers that it once was as companies have left the city or downsized.

It's too much public debt to take on for too little return. The city was fine without pro football for years, and it will be again.

As far as mixed use soccer stadiums...that's a fail plan too. Kansas City built a soccer specific stadium, and it's FANTASTIC. It allows the team to operate within its budget, fill the seats, and provide an amazing fan experience. You just won't get that from a stadium designed for American football. Look around the MSL and you will find that the teams that are really thriving are the ones who have their own stadium.

At the end of the day, LA is a bigger prize for ownership, and they should really just go back home.

[JesusNEVERexisted]

Agreed. Plus there are so many hurdles to this stadium being built. They said they will NOT break ground unless they know the Rams are staying and Kroenke won't give them that assurance. A total disaster would be to have a near BILLION dollar stadium with no one to play in it!

[dmiles2186]

This whole PSL thing is crazy. You alienate a huge portion of your potential fan base and makes seating even more unaffordable.

When they built the dome I was blown away by what they were asking for the PSL stuff...and you ended up with a disinterested fan base that's there to be seen rather than any sort of team spirit. It's a fail model.

I don't believe their flood projections. I'm sorry, I was there in 1993 and saw what happened. All they have done since is raise levies around the city, so when it floods again, and it will, the water will be even deeper in downtown. Believe it or don't, it's still foolish to build it in the proposed site.

Regardless of all that, there just isn't the money to be split between the Blues, Cards, and Rams. There's just too much cost involved for the corporate support...support that isn't even there in the numbers that it once was as companies have left the city or downsized.

It's too much public debt to take on for too little return. The city was fine without pro football for years, and it will be again.

As far as mixed use soccer stadiums...that's a fail plan too. Kansas City built a soccer specific stadium, and it's FANTASTIC. It allows the team to operate within its budget, fill the seats, and provide an amazing fan experience. You just won't get that from a stadium designed for American football. Look around the MSL and you will find that the teams that are really thriving are the ones who have their own stadium.

At the end of the day, LA is a bigger prize for ownership, and they should really just go back home.

So, Cleveland, right?

[not_a_wings_fan]

There's already a dysfunctional team in Cleaveland, sorry.

They should head on back to LA already and let everyone get back to race riots and baseball.

[dmiles2186]

There's already a dysfunctional team in Cleaveland, sorry.

They should head on back to LA already and let everyone get back to race riots and baseball.

But LA stole the Rams from Cleveland (and the Dodgers from Brooklyn, Lakers from Minneapolis, Clippers from San Diego by way of Buffalo...)

I'm just giving you a hard time. I think STL can be a 3 sport town. They've shown that they can support a football team that outright sucks for a long period of time. (I don't care what anyone says, 90% capacity for a team that hasn't been to the playoffs in a decade is good support)

If the Rams leave, then I'm sure NBA/MLS rumors will kick up (pipe down, JNE). Anymore than 3 is too much for STL. but 3 is a perfect number in my mind.

[not_a_wings_fan]

There's already a dysfunctional team in Cleaveland, sorry.

They should head on back to LA already and let everyone get back to race riots and baseball.

But LA stole the Rams from Cleveland (and the Dodgers from Brooklyn, Lakers from Minneapolis, Clippers from San Diego by way of Buffalo...)

I'm just giving you a hard time. I think STL can be a 3 sport town. They've shown that they can support a football team that outright sucks for a long period of time. (I don't care what anyone says, 90% capacity for a team that hasn't been to the playoffs in a decade is good support)

If the Rams leave, then I'm sure NBA/MLS rumors will kick up (pipe down, JNE). Anymore than 3 is too much for STL. but 3 is a perfect number in my mind.

I actually think NBA would do better in STL, actually.
You could likely handle MLS as well if it's done properly... the stadiums are much smaller and the fan base and seasons aren't overlapping.

[cprice12]

This whole PSL thing is crazy. You alienate a huge portion of your potential fan base and makes seating even more unaffordable.

Agreed. But a lot of teams do it that way...and if people are willing to pay it...

When they built the dome I was blown away by what they were asking for the PSL stuff...and you ended up with a disinterested fan base that's there to be seen rather than any sort of team spirit. It's a fail model.

The fans aren't disinterested because of the PSL's. They seem disinterested because the team sucks. When this team was good, the dome was loud and full of enthusiastic fans. It's kind of hard to be enthusiastic and animated when at the game when your team is terrible. Everyone wants to cheer and go crazy, but you can't really do that when you are badly losing.

I don't believe their flood projections. I'm sorry, I was there in 1993 and saw what happened. All they have done since is raise levies around the city, so when it floods again, and it will, the water will be even deeper in downtown. Believe it or don't, it's still foolish to build it in the proposed site.

It was a 100 year flood. It's not like we get floods like that every 10 years. It could be 150 years or longer before we get another flood like that. And besides, the stadium is three feet above where the Mississippi crested in '93. Yes, it is close. And yes, if we get a worse flood than in '93 the stadium may get wet. But the odds of that happening in the next 50 years if very,very slim. And in 50 years, this stadium, if built, will probably have been replaced with something else anyway.

Regardless of all that, there just isn't the money to be split between the Blues, Cards, and Rams. There's just too much cost involved for the corporate support...support that isn't even there in the numbers that it once was as companies have left the city or downsized.

This is kind of a big deal. The number of fortune 500 companies that were in St. Louis when the Rams arrived was in the dozens. Now I think we have one.
With that said...there is still plenty of corporate money to go around.
Smaller markets do just fine with way less corporate support. Green Bay for example...they know how to run a franchise. It has to be outstanding to be a Packers fan in the Green Bay area.
There is plenty of money to be spent by the average fan though. So corporate sponsorship aside, selling seats won't be an issue.

It's too much public debt to take on for too little return. The city was fine without pro football for years, and it will be again.

That is the big debate. If the Edward Jones dome were paid off it wouldn't be as big of a deal. And the city will get by without pro football, but they will lose the revenue generated...and don't kid yourself...it is substantial. From parking, to public transportation, to restaurants, to hotels, shops, etc...it will hurt to lose the Rams.

What the Rams need to do is to get some kind of guarantee from the league that they will host a Superbowl if they build the new stadium. THAT will generate a huge amount of revenue for the area. It would help the league if they would let some of the smaller market cities host it. Yes, they would need to meet some requirements, just like cities do with the Olympics, but hosting a superbowl would be great for the city.

As far as mixed use soccer stadiums...that's a fail plan too. Kansas City built a soccer specific stadium, and it's FANTASTIC. It allows the team to operate within its budget, fill the seats, and provide an amazing fan experience. You just won't get that from a stadium designed for American football. Look around the MSL and you will find that the teams that are really thriving are the ones who have their own stadium.

If St. Louis gets an MLS team, that will only mean good things for the area. And if they have to play in an NFL stadium, so be it. Sure, it's not ideal, but it shouldn't be a deal breaker in us getting a team.
If SLU had built their soccer park a little bigger, we'd already have an MLS team. It's a shame that couldn't be worked out.

At the end of the day, LA is a bigger prize for ownership, and they should really just go back home.

LA has lost two teams. The Rams and Raiders.
Their attendance was piss poor when the teams left.
Why should they get another team? They couldn't hold on to two other franchises. Bigger prize or not, they haven't proven to support their NFL teams.
NFL team owners should bend over backwards to stay in their respective cities instead of up an move for a money grab. THAT is what should really happen.

If Kroenke wanted to stay in St. Louis, he could. He could get a nice stadium, or get a nice renovation to the current dome. He could make it work here if he put forth a real effort. It just sucks he probably bought the team with the sole purpose of relocating to LA. He never had any desire to stay here and that's just wrong...to pull this team out from St. Louis, who really do support this team, is a crime.

[glen a richter]

I don't get why St. Louis doesn't have an NBA team, personally.

[JesusNEVERexisted]

I don't get why St. Louis doesn't have an NBA team, personally.

Haven't you heard why the Hawks left? Let's just say the segregated past of St.Louis is a big factor. I've heard rumblings how the white masses won't support a 90% black team. Now that could have changed by now but that has been mentioned.

[not_a_wings_fan]

Just because other teams use PSL, doesn't mean it's a good choice in STL or even in those cities.

Yes, people paid for PSL and there were people in the stands, but I am talking about the work a day fan that makes up the bulk of your fanbase - those people don't afford PSL. The most rabid Chief fans are the least educated, least employed - all the people you kept out of the dome with PSLs. That sting alienated folks. Trust me on this, it hurts your fan base in a city like STL and the surrounding area. That's even before you don't have a space to properly tailgate...

But the people who bought PSL are the same assholes you despise at Cardinal games. You know who they are...the people that are there to be seen but really don't know anything about baseball much less your team. The same people that judge you by your car and where you went to high school. Classic STL, and you can't deny that you know exactly what I am talking about.

My point isn't about a "worse" flood, it's about the same or even less water being confined to a smaller area this time resulting in high flood waters in Downtown. Go look at what they did and how high that water goes now. There's nothing to say that won't happen next year or the year after. Nothing. Averages are only trends, not absolutes. It's a BAD place to invest a billion dollars.

There's enough corporate money to be split between the current three teams? I don't really think there is - and football will lose. Green Bay has zero competition from other pro sports, much less having one of the greatest baseball teams in the history of sports, in their city. There's really no where else to put your money. You should also look up Green Bay's ownership because it's relevant to your point.

The stadium out there sucked, that's why they couldn't make cash there. Not to mention the ownership/team blew. There's clear evidence that the current Rams group would do a better job than the previous idiots, especially if they can get a better place to play.

I understand your points and your loyalty, and I wouldn't expect you to feel any other way. I just think NBA and MLS are better sports for STL right now. There's nothing wrong with the current stadium and if that's the issue for the team then the best thing STL can do is help them pack.