Rams leaving St. Louis?

Can't get enough of sports even on a development board? Get your fix here. Expect heavy moderation on smack talk.
User avatar
AllThingsKC
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9203
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2004 10:57 am
Location: Kansas City, Missouri (Downtown)
Contact:

Re: Rams leaving St. Louis?

Postby AllThingsKC » Mon Jan 18, 2016 10:48 pm

Doesn't St. Louis and the state of Missouri still owe on the Edwards Jones Dome? I wonder how much of that comes into play with lost revenue.
beautyfromashes wrote:This thread is now worse than the Downtown Stadium/ Save our Stadiums thread. It makes me want to shoot myself in the head everytime I see it turn red. Congratulations ATKC, you now = kcdcchef.

chingon
Hotel President
Hotel President
Posts: 3329
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 6:47 pm
Location: South Plaza

Re: Rams leaving St. Louis?

Postby chingon » Mon Jan 18, 2016 10:58 pm

warwickland wrote:
MidtownCat wrote:How cool is it that Kansas City has an NFL team and little bro to the East doesn't?

At least St. Louis can still pretend they are Chicago and nobody can ever take that away.


get an NHL team and then you can experience midwestern winter pro-sports, the NFL is a joke.

kroenke doesnt give a fuck if the rams are winners...just look at the denver avalanche for confirmation....at least the blues have a goddamned soul, unlike the rams.

ps fuck the state of kansas.


Successfully trolled.



PS - the NHL is the Kansas of pro sports.

nomadcowatbk
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 144
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 3:44 pm

Re: Rams leaving St. Louis?

Postby nomadcowatbk » Tue Jan 19, 2016 7:16 am

RAms are now worth more sucking in LA than sucking in STL

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6016
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Rams leaving St. Louis?

Postby flyingember » Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:31 am

AllThingsKC wrote:Doesn't St. Louis and the state of Missouri still owe on the Edwards Jones Dome? I wonder how much of that comes into play with lost revenue.

http://fox2now.com/2016/01/15/missouri- ... dium-debt/

$72 million, paid on until 2021

Whoever approved the out on the stadium in the contract and didn't make it contingent on paying off the existing stadium was an idiot.

shinatoo
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 5919
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:20 pm
Location: Lee's Summit

Re: Rams leaving St. Louis?

Postby shinatoo » Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:46 am

Like the Sprint Center, the Jones Dome will probably now be more profitable as just a convention/event space.
Quocunque Jeceris Stabit

User avatar
WSPanic
Hotel President
Hotel President
Posts: 3212
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: Rams leaving St. Louis?

Postby WSPanic » Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:58 am

shinatoo wrote:Like the Sprint Center, the Jones Dome will probably now be more profitable as just a convention/event space.


They were already free to use it 42 weeks a year as a convention/event space. Not thinking the extra 10 wks of availability is really going to make a difference. Are there that many huge groups looking to travel to St Louis, MO for a winter convention?

brewcrew1000
Valencia Place
Valencia Place
Posts: 1978
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 10:10 am
Location: Broadway/Gilham according to google maps

Re: Rams leaving St. Louis?

Postby brewcrew1000 » Tue Jan 19, 2016 10:43 am

I think as the big 4 sports sees a decline in populatiry, it kind of already is among young people with more things like the Internet, Gaming, Extreme Sports interesting our youth I think more and more cities will start saying no to owners when it comes to public money and new Stadiums. Its already happening with the Olympics, I think it will eventually happen with FIFA and other big events. Beside these 3 NFL teams, what other cities are on the horizon to threaten to leave is something new isn't built. Buffalo Bills? Pistons? White Sox?

kcjak
Valencia Place
Valencia Place
Posts: 1758
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 3:02 pm

Re: Rams leaving St. Louis?

Postby kcjak » Tue Jan 19, 2016 3:56 pm

Didn't St Louis have the opportunity to approve something like $700 million in dome improvements a few years ago to keep the Rams? Even with the $1 billion+ new riverfront stadium, keeping in the top 8 facilities in the NFL would've meant tens or hundreds of additional dollars within a few years, anyway, given the state of what's being built recently.

User avatar
Eon Blue
Colonnade
Colonnade
Posts: 914
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 11:28 pm
Location: Downtown KCMO

Re: Rams leaving St. Louis?

Postby Eon Blue » Tue Jan 19, 2016 4:19 pm

kcjak wrote:Didn't St Louis have the opportunity to approve something like $700 million in dome improvements a few years ago to keep the Rams? Even with the $1 billion+ new riverfront stadium, keeping in the top 8 facilities in the NFL would've meant tens or hundreds of additional dollars within a few years, anyway, given the state of what's being built recently.

They were willing to do it but the team and the NFL said that wasn't enough.

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6016
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Rams leaving St. Louis?

Postby flyingember » Wed Jan 20, 2016 12:07 pm

kcjak wrote:Didn't St Louis have the opportunity to approve something like $700 million in dome improvements a few years ago to keep the Rams? Even with the $1 billion+ new riverfront stadium, keeping in the top 8 facilities in the NFL would've meant tens or hundreds of additional dollars within a few years, anyway, given the state of what's being built recently.


opportunity?

they had bought most of the land, were working on ways to bypass a vote, etc.

It was never about the stadium, it was about finding a way out of St. Louis. The funding source was junk but you have to give credit to the city for putting together a plan so quickly and it became obvious that Kroenke never intended to stay.

aknowledgeableperson
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 12188
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:31 pm

Re: Rams leaving St. Louis?

Postby aknowledgeableperson » Wed Jan 20, 2016 1:24 pm

" it became obvious that Kroenke never intended to stay."

When Sterling had to sell the Clippers and got that amazing price the money opened up the eyes to many owners about the value of having an LA team. Haven't heard exact numbers but a few have stated the value of the Rams about doubled since the move was approved. I think the only reason the Chargers haven't announced a move to La also is the owner is looking at squeezing the best deal from Kroenke. Besides, what's the rush.

brewcrew1000
Valencia Place
Valencia Place
Posts: 1978
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 10:10 am
Location: Broadway/Gilham according to google maps

Re: Rams leaving St. Louis?

Postby brewcrew1000 » Wed Jan 20, 2016 2:46 pm

I guarantee Kroenke sells the team in 5 years, then doubles the rent on the owner who buys it or sells the entire package for 5 billion plus

aknowledgeableperson
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 12188
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:31 pm

Re: Rams leaving St. Louis?

Postby aknowledgeableperson » Wed Jan 20, 2016 6:03 pm

aknowledgeableperson wrote:" it became obvious that Kroenke never intended to stay."

When Sterling had to sell the Clippers and got that amazing price the money opened up the eyes to many owners about the value of having an LA team. Haven't heard exact numbers but a few have stated the value of the Rams about doubled since the move was approved. I think the only reason the Chargers haven't announced a move to La also is the owner is looking at squeezing the best deal from Kroenke. Besides, what's the rush.


Here is one estimate:
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/moving-ram ... 11754.html
"In a story for the Washington Post, Michael Ozanian of Forbes said the value of the Rams "doubles" now that they are in Los Angeles, which would put their current value at approximately $2.9 billion.

In Forbes' most-recent valuations of NFL teams, the Rams ranked 28th out of the 32 NFL teams with a valuation of $1.45 billion. This was up from $930 million in 2014 when the team ranked dead last.

A $2.9 billion valuation for the Rams jives with our estimate in early 2015 that placed the value of an NFL franchise in Los Angeles at $2.5-3.5 billion. The Dallas Cowboys are the most valuable NFL team, worth $4.0 billion, according to Forbes.

The $1.45 billion increase for the Rams more than makes up for the $550 million price tag for the move, in the form of the relocation fee the team must pay the other owners.
...
This means that the value of the Rams will actually nearly triple from their move to the Los Angeles, from something closer to the $930 million valuation in 2014 to approximately $3 billion."

User avatar
warwickland
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4614
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 6:29 pm
Location: University City, MO

Re: Rams leaving St. Louis?

Postby warwickland » Sat Jan 23, 2016 5:36 pm

chingon wrote:
warwickland wrote:
MidtownCat wrote:How cool is it that Kansas City has an NFL team and little bro to the East doesn't?

At least St. Louis can still pretend they are Chicago and nobody can ever take that away.


get an NHL team and then you can experience midwestern winter pro-sports, the NFL is a joke.

kroenke doesnt give a fuck if the rams are winners...just look at the denver avalanche for confirmation....at least the blues have a goddamned soul, unlike the rams.

ps fuck the state of kansas.


Successfully trolled.



PS - the NHL is the Kansas of pro sports.


theres a certain je nai se quoi in the innocence afforded by a successful trolling.

Image
playbuzz.com

mgsports
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2322
Joined: Sat May 31, 2008 7:00 pm

Re: Rams leaving St. Louis?

Postby mgsports » Sun Jan 24, 2016 8:58 pm

MLS? Bills would go to Toronto.

aknowledgeableperson
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 12188
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:31 pm

Re: Rams leaving St. Louis?

Postby aknowledgeableperson » Sun Jan 24, 2016 9:24 pm

Don't believe the NFL wants to go into Canada and compete with Canadian football.

User avatar
AllThingsKC
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9203
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2004 10:57 am
Location: Kansas City, Missouri (Downtown)
Contact:

Re: Rams leaving St. Louis?

Postby AllThingsKC » Mon Jan 25, 2016 1:59 pm

.
beautyfromashes wrote:This thread is now worse than the Downtown Stadium/ Save our Stadiums thread. It makes me want to shoot myself in the head everytime I see it turn red. Congratulations ATKC, you now = kcdcchef.

User avatar
FangKC
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 12220
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Rams leaving St. Louis?

Postby FangKC » Mon Jan 25, 2016 2:41 pm

From the Roanoke Times (Roanoke, VA)

Our view: Lessons from St. Louis

The National Football League owners have voted to move the Rams from St. Louis back to Los Angeles.

Here’s why that matters to Roanoke: We don’t want to be St. Louis.

It’s not that we’re in danger of losing a pro football team, of course, but some of the factors that played into the NFL’s decision to abandon St. Louis speak directly to us here.

First, let’s acknowledge the obvious: Rams owner Stan Kroenke simply felt he could make more money in Los Angeles than St. Louis. You can call that greed if you want, but the team’s relocation also perfectly illustrates the free market: Businesses will go where they think they can make the most money. Get used to it.

What’s of more interest to us is part of the argument that Kroenke made to fellow owners – that St. Louis is basically a dying city that could no longer support three pro sports franchises, the baseball Cardinals and the hockey Blues being the other two.

Some of that was surely contrived to help make the Rams’ case for getting out, but there are some worrisome demographics trends in St. Louis – trends that we here in Roanoke should pay attention to, as well, especially with a City Council election coming up in May.

One way to look at St. Louis is to compare and contrast it with the big city on the other side of the state – Kansas City. Think of this as a “tale of two cities.”

Since 2010, the St. Louis metro area registered only minimal population growth; Kansas City grew by 3.1 percent. In raw numbers, the Kansas City metro added more than three times as many people as St. Louis.

The namesake city at the center of each metro area went in different directions. St. Louis lost population; Kansas City gained.

More interestingly, Kansas City has become one of the nation’s top magnets for Millennials. In the years coming out of the recession, for every Millennial that moved to St. Louis, 13 moved to Kansas City.

All this matters because population growth is often a good measure of economic growth – people don’t move somewhere if there aren’t jobs for them. Indeed, the recently-released “Best Performing Cities” report by the Milken Institute shows that Kansas City has outpaced St. Louis in both job growth and wage growth.

...


http://tinyurl.com/zspcsw6

brewcrew1000
Valencia Place
Valencia Place
Posts: 1978
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 10:10 am
Location: Broadway/Gilham according to google maps

Re: Rams leaving St. Louis?

Postby brewcrew1000 » Tue Jan 26, 2016 11:33 am

New plans for a Football stadium near Union Station, it would be funny if they traded football for futbol
http://fox2now.com/2016/01/25/new-plans ... n-station/

ztonyg
Parking Garage
Parking Garage
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2015 9:38 pm
Location: Peoria, AZ

Re: Rams leaving St. Louis?

Postby ztonyg » Tue Jan 26, 2016 5:06 pm

brewcrew1000 wrote:I think as the big 4 sports sees a decline in populatiry, it kind of already is among young people with more things like the Internet, Gaming, Extreme Sports interesting our youth I think more and more cities will start saying no to owners when it comes to public money and new Stadiums. Its already happening with the Olympics, I think it will eventually happen with FIFA and other big events. Beside these 3 NFL teams, what other cities are on the horizon to threaten to leave is something new isn't built. Buffalo Bills? Pistons? White Sox?


The Bills were bought by a local Buffalo guy who has publicly come out to say that he doesn't want to move the team. The Jaguars are probably the NFL team most likely to relocate, and if they go anywhere, it's to London.

The Pistons in all likelihood will work out a deal with the Red Wings to share the arena in Downtown Detroit. There was bad blood between the two organizations when the Pistons had their previous owner, but that bad blood seems to have gone away. The Pistons also own their arena (and the land it sits on) and have just invested several million dollars to improve it, so there really isn't much of a rush.

The White Sox will never leave Chicago. Baseball is probably the most difficult sport to relocate and their stadium is not THAT old. The Tampa Bay Rays are probably the most likely MLB team to move.

I've actually heard rumors (for years) that the St. Louis Blues could move to Canada. The Arizona Coyotes also are likely to move (although their ownership has publicly stated that they may work with the Phoenix Suns on a new joint use arena). Las Vegas just opened up an arena up to NBA/NHL standards, so there's always the chance someone moves over there.


Return to “Kansas City Sports”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests