Ladies and gentlemen, your Los Angeles Rams!
January 12, 2016 6:34 PM Subscribe
NFL football returns to Los Angeles next season. After 20 years in St. Louis, the Rams will be relocating (or re-relocating) to Los Angeles, to play in a new stadium built by owner, Walmart heir, and real estate mogul Stan Kroenke. The San Diego Chargers will have the option to join next season.
Needless to say, St. Louis fans are miffed as history repeats itself and they lose their second team in 30 years, after Kroenke released an inflammatory report on his rationale for leaving the city.
Needless to say, St. Louis fans are miffed as history repeats itself and they lose their second team in 30 years, after Kroenke released an inflammatory report on his rationale for leaving the city.
I'd like to take credit for this — clearly, after my fictional LA team won a MeFi league fantasy championship, they realized the potential.
posted by klangklangston at 6:38 PM on January 12, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by klangklangston at 6:38 PM on January 12, 2016 [2 favorites]
If you watched the whole stadium funding debacle play out, you'll know this is a good thing for St. Louis, whatever the 17 dipshit aldermen who voted to fund it think. Pro sports teams are like a cancer on the cities they inhabit.
posted by invitapriore at 6:39 PM on January 12, 2016 [75 favorites]
posted by invitapriore at 6:39 PM on January 12, 2016 [75 favorites]
I'm a Bills fan, we recently went through a lengthy will-they-move ordeal and holy cats I wouldn't wish that on anyone. I know it's just sports, but it really, really sucks, and my heart goes out to the Rams and Chargers fans.
posted by everybody had matching towels at 6:43 PM on January 12, 2016 [5 favorites]
posted by everybody had matching towels at 6:43 PM on January 12, 2016 [5 favorites]
I feel like if the city funds the stadium, the city should get a percentage of merchandise and ticket sales.
posted by Pope Guilty at 6:48 PM on January 12, 2016 [30 favorites]
posted by Pope Guilty at 6:48 PM on January 12, 2016 [30 favorites]
Hell, we'd a given them the Lions. All they had to do was ask nicely...
posted by Chrischris at 6:48 PM on January 12, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by Chrischris at 6:48 PM on January 12, 2016 [3 favorites]
I really thought they might let the Raiders move, too. Three teams in a city would be something.
posted by Chrysostom at 6:50 PM on January 12, 2016
posted by Chrysostom at 6:50 PM on January 12, 2016
Look... St Louis has Nelly. I'm sure they'll be fine.
posted by selfnoise at 6:57 PM on January 12, 2016 [12 favorites]
posted by selfnoise at 6:57 PM on January 12, 2016 [12 favorites]
I recently moved from Los Angeles to Seattle and one of the things I've been most homesick for about LA is the fact that I didn't have to pretend to give a shit about football when I lived there.
posted by town of cats at 6:59 PM on January 12, 2016 [23 favorites]
posted by town of cats at 6:59 PM on January 12, 2016 [23 favorites]
So, they get to keep their name and legacy? As a Baltimore fan, I rankle with empathy.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 7:00 PM on January 12, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 7:00 PM on January 12, 2016 [2 favorites]
ChurchHatesTucker: The Thunder owns Seattle's past, as well as a current team who's core was drafted by the Sonics. It sucks.
posted by lkc at 7:13 PM on January 12, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by lkc at 7:13 PM on January 12, 2016 [2 favorites]
The San Diego Chargers will have the option to join next season.
This has always made sense to me: The Chargers are just as terrible a team as LA is a city.
posted by shakespeherian at 7:14 PM on January 12, 2016 [2 favorites]
This has always made sense to me: The Chargers are just as terrible a team as LA is a city.
posted by shakespeherian at 7:14 PM on January 12, 2016 [2 favorites]
As a former resident of St. Louis, that city can't catch a break. That said the city/county has had trouble making the bond payments on the existing stadium for the last 15 years. The state has stepped in multiple times to help. Shelling out for another stadium seemed crazy. Kroenke has wanted to move to LA from day one. Bad luck for Rams fans when Kroenke ended up owning their football team.
posted by LoveHam at 7:16 PM on January 12, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by LoveHam at 7:16 PM on January 12, 2016 [3 favorites]
Ugh. More traffic, hype and jock malarkey!
posted by Ursula Hitler at 7:23 PM on January 12, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Ursula Hitler at 7:23 PM on January 12, 2016 [1 favorite]
I'm just glad the planned stadium is nowhere near my commute. My previous commute took me past Staples Center and sometimes Dodger Stadium. No thanks.
posted by JauntyFedora at 7:23 PM on January 12, 2016
posted by JauntyFedora at 7:23 PM on January 12, 2016
Kroenke is a scumbag but the Rams belong in LA. Spanos is a scumbag period. Mark Davis is a genius and a great, handsome man and he is somehow gonna get an Oakland stadium out of this and that rules.
posted by Drinky Die at 7:23 PM on January 12, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Drinky Die at 7:23 PM on January 12, 2016 [1 favorite]
Not the Chargers! What of their most glorious disco fight song? It just won't work with LA.
posted by ghost phoneme at 7:28 PM on January 12, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by ghost phoneme at 7:28 PM on January 12, 2016 [3 favorites]
I want to see if the promise of doing this without a dime of public money is kept. Santa Clara was told no public money and we all know how that one turned out (no public money except for apparently the $114m worth of public works, the redevelopment fund that should have been helping modernize schools and extra taxes that aren't going into the general fund but oops we don't have to revote on that). Already Inglewood is talking about $60m worth of tax subsidies as reimbursement for infrastructure works performed at the site. At least Levi's Stadium is making a mild surplus for the city for what appears to be no risk currently.
posted by Talez at 7:30 PM on January 12, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Talez at 7:30 PM on January 12, 2016 [2 favorites]
Wouldn't the Raiders have made more sense? Isn't there still an enclave of hardcore Raiders fans in LA. In the long run, this is going to be the NFL version of the NHL trying to keep Hockey in Phoenix.
posted by drezdn at 7:31 PM on January 12, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by drezdn at 7:31 PM on January 12, 2016 [1 favorite]
So, they get to keep their name and legacy?
The Rams have played more years in Los Angeles (1946-94) than in St. Louis, so that seems unlikely.
posted by fitnr at 7:32 PM on January 12, 2016 [3 favorites]
The Rams have played more years in Los Angeles (1946-94) than in St. Louis, so that seems unlikely.
posted by fitnr at 7:32 PM on January 12, 2016 [3 favorites]
Wouldn't the Raiders have made more sense?
For the Raiders LA was a decade and a bit long detour. For the Rams it's a once long term LA team returning home.
posted by Talez at 7:34 PM on January 12, 2016 [2 favorites]
For the Raiders LA was a decade and a bit long detour. For the Rams it's a once long term LA team returning home.
posted by Talez at 7:34 PM on January 12, 2016 [2 favorites]
i hope the walton heirs keep moving further away and continue giving northwest arkansas amazing museums in their absences.
posted by nadawi at 7:35 PM on January 12, 2016 [6 favorites]
posted by nadawi at 7:35 PM on January 12, 2016 [6 favorites]
There'll never be a better day to listen to "(Nobody Cares About the St. Louis) Rams," by Diskothi-Q.
posted by escabeche at 7:36 PM on January 12, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by escabeche at 7:36 PM on January 12, 2016 [2 favorites]
James L. Brooks: Or perhaps you like to go to a football game?Soon that gag will make no sense in a contemporary context.
Ned Flanders: Well--
Brooks: We don't have a team.
Ned: Noo!!
posted by Talez at 7:36 PM on January 12, 2016 [2 favorites]
Wouldn't the Raiders have made more sense?
The other plan would have put the Chargers and the Raiders in the same stadium which would have probably required divisional realignment and been a big pain in the ass. Plus, the Bay Area is a great market and can easily handle two teams. There is a lot more future profit there than in St. Louis or San Diego.
posted by Drinky Die at 7:39 PM on January 12, 2016
The other plan would have put the Chargers and the Raiders in the same stadium which would have probably required divisional realignment and been a big pain in the ass. Plus, the Bay Area is a great market and can easily handle two teams. There is a lot more future profit there than in St. Louis or San Diego.
posted by Drinky Die at 7:39 PM on January 12, 2016
As an Orange County-based 49ers fan this is great as now I'll have the chance to see my favorite team live every year without having to drive more than 20 miles or so.
posted by The Gooch at 7:42 PM on January 12, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by The Gooch at 7:42 PM on January 12, 2016 [1 favorite]
Inglewood!
So 16 years ago a carpet-bagging out of state real estate tycoon re-made downtown LA with a major league arena that supplanted the one in Inglewood (and thought he could snare an NFL club for a stadium next to Staples without actually owning a team), and now here comes another out of state carpet-bagging real estate tycoon to re-make Inglewood.
It's Chinatown, but instead of water, it's Big League Sports.
posted by notyou at 7:43 PM on January 12, 2016 [2 favorites]
So 16 years ago a carpet-bagging out of state real estate tycoon re-made downtown LA with a major league arena that supplanted the one in Inglewood (and thought he could snare an NFL club for a stadium next to Staples without actually owning a team), and now here comes another out of state carpet-bagging real estate tycoon to re-make Inglewood.
It's Chinatown, but instead of water, it's Big League Sports.
posted by notyou at 7:43 PM on January 12, 2016 [2 favorites]
The Raiders should just move in with the Niners, down in Santa Clara.
posted by notyou at 7:44 PM on January 12, 2016
posted by notyou at 7:44 PM on January 12, 2016
That venue will compete with Staples and the convention center downtown for events, concerts, conventions, meetings, et cetera.
Except the scale of the thing, and the bona fides that come with being an NFL facility, will dwarf what AEG has built downtown.
posted by notyou at 7:53 PM on January 12, 2016
Except the scale of the thing, and the bona fides that come with being an NFL facility, will dwarf what AEG has built downtown.
posted by notyou at 7:53 PM on January 12, 2016
The Raiders should just move in with the Niners, down in Santa Clara.
Raiders don't want to be secondary tenants. It was really too late for that when the stadium got built without the Raiders being involved.
posted by Drinky Die at 7:58 PM on January 12, 2016
Raiders don't want to be secondary tenants. It was really too late for that when the stadium got built without the Raiders being involved.
posted by Drinky Die at 7:58 PM on January 12, 2016
Wow, I'm actually surprised. I thought the NFL would never allow a team to move to LA, because the threat of that got massive public subsidies to keep a team local or move a team to anywhere but LA. The threat of "Build us a new stadium or we'll move to St. Louis" is laughable.
STL got a break here. They were absolutely fucked by the last stadium deal and would have been fucked squared by a new one. They don't have to deal with that.
posted by eriko at 8:04 PM on January 12, 2016 [5 favorites]
STL got a break here. They were absolutely fucked by the last stadium deal and would have been fucked squared by a new one. They don't have to deal with that.
posted by eriko at 8:04 PM on January 12, 2016 [5 favorites]
The NFL has been using the threat of a move to LA to shake down other cities, but I guess they can use some other city for that now? Maybe St. Louis?
posted by Area Man at 8:05 PM on January 12, 2016
posted by Area Man at 8:05 PM on January 12, 2016
The City of Oakland is already not falling for their bullshit. St Louis Raiders?
posted by Talez at 8:07 PM on January 12, 2016 [5 favorites]
posted by Talez at 8:07 PM on January 12, 2016 [5 favorites]
The threat of "Build us a new stadium or we'll move to St. Louis" is laughable.
And yet, the Rams moved there from LA in the first place so they could get a stadium. The LA blackmail threat being the reason there is no team there has always been overblown. A lot of cities will give in to the stadium shakedown to get a team. San Antonio has a dome they built to attract a team that never came. There is much more money for the owners in having teams in LA than not having them.
London will be a big topic going forward, but also any reasonably sized market willing to help pay for a stadium.
The City of Oakland is already not falling for their bullshit. St Louis Raiders?
It's looking like the NFL is going to make the Oakland stadium happen. It's an easier pill to swallow when you are getting $1.5 billion in relocation fees from the Chargers and Rams.
posted by Drinky Die at 8:09 PM on January 12, 2016
And yet, the Rams moved there from LA in the first place so they could get a stadium. The LA blackmail threat being the reason there is no team there has always been overblown. A lot of cities will give in to the stadium shakedown to get a team. San Antonio has a dome they built to attract a team that never came. There is much more money for the owners in having teams in LA than not having them.
London will be a big topic going forward, but also any reasonably sized market willing to help pay for a stadium.
The City of Oakland is already not falling for their bullshit. St Louis Raiders?
It's looking like the NFL is going to make the Oakland stadium happen. It's an easier pill to swallow when you are getting $1.5 billion in relocation fees from the Chargers and Rams.
posted by Drinky Die at 8:09 PM on January 12, 2016
I'm a St. Louisian and a sports fan, but I'm not a Rams fan, and the NFL is by far my last favorite live experience to attend so I'm not personally affected by this. That said:
I hate this so much because Stan Kroenke wins. His $6.2 Billion net worth and keeping a terrible product on the field and avoiding the local media at all costs and salting the earth and disparaging the city's name as he rides out on his golden train just really pisses me off. Fuck you, Stan. Chickenshit.
posted by Ufez Jones at 8:19 PM on January 12, 2016 [18 favorites]
I hate this so much because Stan Kroenke wins. His $6.2 Billion net worth and keeping a terrible product on the field and avoiding the local media at all costs and salting the earth and disparaging the city's name as he rides out on his golden train just really pisses me off. Fuck you, Stan. Chickenshit.
posted by Ufez Jones at 8:19 PM on January 12, 2016 [18 favorites]
Yet another twist of the knife in the back of the sad, sad sports fans that are San Diegans. (Yes, I can say this, for I am a native San Diegan who has been strung along by the Bolts for a miserable lifetime)
posted by mynameisluka at 8:30 PM on January 12, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by mynameisluka at 8:30 PM on January 12, 2016 [1 favorite]
Minor point, but am I the only one who thinks it's weird that LA could have two teams that use blue and yellow as their primary colors?
posted by mcmile at 8:39 PM on January 12, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by mcmile at 8:39 PM on January 12, 2016 [2 favorites]
OK, I guess the Rams are blue and gold nowadays, but it's still pretty close.
posted by mcmile at 8:42 PM on January 12, 2016
posted by mcmile at 8:42 PM on January 12, 2016
I'm honestly surprised the NFL hasn't tried to expand internationally more than it has. Even if those countries don't really play the sport at the moment. Drinky Die mentions London. Paris, Berlin, Madrid, etc. could probably support a team. The NFL is just as much a growth-focused corporate entity as anything else in modern business. There are only so many markets in the US that can support a team. There are a lot of cities internationally that could. There's only one direction they can go to maintain profits.
posted by downtohisturtles at 8:42 PM on January 12, 2016
posted by downtohisturtles at 8:42 PM on January 12, 2016
London will be a big topic going forward
I thought zero-gee ball was still in the handwavium stage
posted by mwhybark at 8:55 PM on January 12, 2016 [1 favorite]
I thought zero-gee ball was still in the handwavium stage
posted by mwhybark at 8:55 PM on January 12, 2016 [1 favorite]
Congrats to St. Louis. NFL teams are like an infection that cities catch.
posted by LastOfHisKind at 8:56 PM on January 12, 2016 [11 favorites]
posted by LastOfHisKind at 8:56 PM on January 12, 2016 [11 favorites]
I'm honestly surprised the NFL hasn't tried to expand internationally more than it has
I was under the impression that travel times and time zones were the sticking points there, especially for the west coast.
I suppose a 9 hour flight isn't a major deal if you've got a cushy enough plane, but look at the wonky scheduling they have to do with the Olympics to get events into prime TV viewing hours.
I know some hardcore football fans, but only a few of them would get up to watch the Cleveland Browns play the London Chavs on the Ocho at 3 in the morning.
posted by madajb at 8:56 PM on January 12, 2016 [6 favorites]
I was under the impression that travel times and time zones were the sticking points there, especially for the west coast.
I suppose a 9 hour flight isn't a major deal if you've got a cushy enough plane, but look at the wonky scheduling they have to do with the Olympics to get events into prime TV viewing hours.
I know some hardcore football fans, but only a few of them would get up to watch the Cleveland Browns play the London Chavs on the Ocho at 3 in the morning.
posted by madajb at 8:56 PM on January 12, 2016 [6 favorites]
it seem more likely that mexico and canada will get teams first, but they do keep going to london to play, so who knows...
posted by nadawi at 9:13 PM on January 12, 2016
posted by nadawi at 9:13 PM on January 12, 2016
canada will get teams first
It would be outstanding if visiting teams had to play with three downs and unlimited backfield motion, as God intended.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 9:22 PM on January 12, 2016 [8 favorites]
It would be outstanding if visiting teams had to play with three downs and unlimited backfield motion, as God intended.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 9:22 PM on January 12, 2016 [8 favorites]
Talez: Soon that gag will make no sense in a contemporary context.
Nah, they moved toPhoenix LA.
posted by tonycpsu at 9:34 PM on January 12, 2016
Nah, they moved to
posted by tonycpsu at 9:34 PM on January 12, 2016
STL sold its soul to get football back. Now it gets a refund.
posted by dta at 10:20 PM on January 12, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by dta at 10:20 PM on January 12, 2016 [1 favorite]
I moved from St. Louis to Seattle so I could live in a city with a proper football team. (Okay, not the only reason, but it was on the list.) This and the Black Lives Matter protests are the only things that have made me miss the city a little. Best thing that ever happened to you, STL.
posted by thetortoise at 10:52 PM on January 12, 2016
posted by thetortoise at 10:52 PM on January 12, 2016
The Rams were the Cleveland Rams from 1936 to 1945. The Chargers played in Los Angeles their first season (1960).
posted by kirkaracha at 10:56 PM on January 12, 2016
posted by kirkaracha at 10:56 PM on January 12, 2016
I want the A's back. I would instantly totally abandon the Phillies if they moved back.
posted by Drinky Die at 11:04 PM on January 12, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Drinky Die at 11:04 PM on January 12, 2016 [2 favorites]
I wished the Raiders had come back instead, mostly because they have the coolest uniforms.
posted by infinitewindow at 11:30 PM on January 12, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by infinitewindow at 11:30 PM on January 12, 2016 [1 favorite]
I feel like if the city funds the stadium, the city should get a percentage of merchandise and ticket sales.
I feel like that since the NFL ownership is unable or unwilling to fund their own stadiums, the cities should step in and become the stewards of the physical plant alongside a leadership board voted in by the stockholders. With revenues and sustainability guaranteed by the television-viewing public, I don't think there's a need for deep-pocketed owners in a monopolist system any more.
That goes for the other major leagues as well. Distributed, local ownership would prevent both the yearly blackmailing routines and the eventual astronomical subsidies afforded to a very small group of people.
posted by jsavimbi at 11:32 PM on January 12, 2016 [1 favorite]
I feel like that since the NFL ownership is unable or unwilling to fund their own stadiums, the cities should step in and become the stewards of the physical plant alongside a leadership board voted in by the stockholders. With revenues and sustainability guaranteed by the television-viewing public, I don't think there's a need for deep-pocketed owners in a monopolist system any more.
That goes for the other major leagues as well. Distributed, local ownership would prevent both the yearly blackmailing routines and the eventual astronomical subsidies afforded to a very small group of people.
posted by jsavimbi at 11:32 PM on January 12, 2016 [1 favorite]
I don't know shit about sports but you have to give it to Oakland's Mayor Schaaf. Oakland is still going to be paying debt obligations for another decade or two on the existing Coliseum, and these motherfuckers are trying to shake us down again. Well played.
posted by bradbane at 11:44 PM on January 12, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by bradbane at 11:44 PM on January 12, 2016 [4 favorites]
Every time the Thunder talk about wearing a throwback uniform I want to throw up. In another parallel, Gurley was named Rookie of the year this morning. The Sonics bailed the year that Durant was named Rookie of the year.
I feel for the St Louis fans - I was in Missouri when they moved there, and damn they were SO EXCITED. It feels wrong for a team in Arizona to be named the Cardinals, too, frankly.
I hope this works out for St Louis like losing the Sonics did for Seattle: we got an MLS team that a lot of that energy got poured into instead. Some folks make fun of our shared stadium situation and turf, but for the most part, it's working out great.
(I still hope we get an NBA team again... but not because I want NBA. It's just the only way we'll get an NHL team, stadium sharing with ice under parquet).
posted by taterpie at 12:25 AM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
I feel for the St Louis fans - I was in Missouri when they moved there, and damn they were SO EXCITED. It feels wrong for a team in Arizona to be named the Cardinals, too, frankly.
I hope this works out for St Louis like losing the Sonics did for Seattle: we got an MLS team that a lot of that energy got poured into instead. Some folks make fun of our shared stadium situation and turf, but for the most part, it's working out great.
(I still hope we get an NBA team again... but not because I want NBA. It's just the only way we'll get an NHL team, stadium sharing with ice under parquet).
posted by taterpie at 12:25 AM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
With revenues and sustainability guaranteed by the television-viewing public, I don't think there's a need for deep-pocketed owners in a monopolist system any more.
The publicly owned Green Bay Packers prove you don't need a deep pocket owner, brand new stadium, or huge media market to be consistently among the top franchises in the league.
So the league banned that ownership model for any other team.
posted by Drinky Die at 12:30 AM on January 13, 2016 [38 favorites]
The publicly owned Green Bay Packers prove you don't need a deep pocket owner, brand new stadium, or huge media market to be consistently among the top franchises in the league.
So the league banned that ownership model for any other team.
posted by Drinky Die at 12:30 AM on January 13, 2016 [38 favorites]
I'm honestly surprised the NFL hasn't tried to expand internationally more than it has
The thing is, most of the world doesn't really care for NFL. Football (soccer) is the top game throughout the world and although it's become bloated corporate nonsense in many ways, at least it takes place at many levels in many countries, with local people at least potentially having some kind of attachment to teams they see play. This gives rise to meaningful tournaments between countries, or between teams from different countries like the World Cup, European Championship, Champions League, Copa América and Copa Libertadores.
I'm not sure that getting spectators in to NFL is going to be an attractive proposition in cities with big football clubs. Sports fans have a finite disposable income after all, even though it may not seem so at times.
posted by 1head2arms2legs at 1:48 AM on January 13, 2016
The thing is, most of the world doesn't really care for NFL. Football (soccer) is the top game throughout the world and although it's become bloated corporate nonsense in many ways, at least it takes place at many levels in many countries, with local people at least potentially having some kind of attachment to teams they see play. This gives rise to meaningful tournaments between countries, or between teams from different countries like the World Cup, European Championship, Champions League, Copa América and Copa Libertadores.
I'm not sure that getting spectators in to NFL is going to be an attractive proposition in cities with big football clubs. Sports fans have a finite disposable income after all, even though it may not seem so at times.
posted by 1head2arms2legs at 1:48 AM on January 13, 2016
The owners basically gave it all to Kroenke wrapped up with a bow. I've heard rumors that basically said he was either going to get his way or sue the league for collusion in a way that must have brought on Al Davis flashbacks. This has been a years-long game of hardball and it's not over yet. Either the Raiders will get a new stadium in Oakland or they may wind up looking at alternative venues – San Antonio has been the one I've seen mentioned a lot.
The big plus is that Inglewood is not being publicly financed. It's actually being built by the billionaire owner like a lot of us have been saying stadiums should. Whatever else is going on, that's a step forward and I like it.
posted by graymouser at 3:16 AM on January 13, 2016
The big plus is that Inglewood is not being publicly financed. It's actually being built by the billionaire owner like a lot of us have been saying stadiums should. Whatever else is going on, that's a step forward and I like it.
posted by graymouser at 3:16 AM on January 13, 2016
Pope Guilty: "I feel like if the city funds the stadium, the city should get a percentage of merchandise and ticket sales."
You'd think, wouldn't you?
posted by Samizdata at 3:18 AM on January 13, 2016
You'd think, wouldn't you?
posted by Samizdata at 3:18 AM on January 13, 2016
mynameisluka: "Yet another twist of the knife in the back of the sad, sad sports fans that are San Diegans. (Yes, I can say this, for I am a native San Diegan who has been strung along by the Bolts for a miserable lifetime)"
Semi-reformed ex-San Diegan here. (Technically, a Julianite, but tomato...)
posted by Samizdata at 3:21 AM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
Semi-reformed ex-San Diegan here. (Technically, a Julianite, but tomato...)
posted by Samizdata at 3:21 AM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
It's looking like the NFL is going to make the Oakland stadium happen. It's an easier pill to swallow when you are getting $1.5 billion in relocation fees from the Chargers and Rams.
When I see it I will believe the other 31 owners are going to gift the taxpayers of Oakland 500 mil when they can extort that amount from any one of seven other cities' taxpayers.
posted by bukvich at 5:00 AM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
When I see it I will believe the other 31 owners are going to gift the taxpayers of Oakland 500 mil when they can extort that amount from any one of seven other cities' taxpayers.
posted by bukvich at 5:00 AM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
I'm honestly surprised the NFL hasn't tried to expand internationally more than it has
NFL Europe was a money hemorrhaging disaster from day one. Most of the rest of the world finds American football too slow with too many stoppages, because they're used to the constant pace of soccer and basketball.
posted by T.D. Strange at 5:21 AM on January 13, 2016
NFL Europe was a money hemorrhaging disaster from day one. Most of the rest of the world finds American football too slow with too many stoppages, because they're used to the constant pace of soccer and basketball.
posted by T.D. Strange at 5:21 AM on January 13, 2016
50 Things We Would Rather Keep in St. Louis Than the Rams
posted by Foosnark at 5:42 AM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Foosnark at 5:42 AM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
Yeah, a lot of my friends from college are very politically active in STL, and the level of disgust and anger there is about the proposed stadium to keep the Rams in St. Louis was pretty impressive. It would have totally gutted the riverfront and downtown area. I'm sure football fans are sad, but I'm also pretty sure the majority of die-hard Rams fans aren't actually living in the city of St. Louis.
posted by ChuraChura at 6:13 AM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by ChuraChura at 6:13 AM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
> I know it's just sports
It's not sports, St. Louis. It's strictly business.
posted by The Card Cheat at 6:17 AM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
It's not sports, St. Louis. It's strictly business.
posted by The Card Cheat at 6:17 AM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
I'm honestly surprised the NFL hasn't tried to expand internationally more than it has
Oh, it has. Roger Goodell has been pushing for a London team for a while.
In addition to the points raised above about its relative popularity, reports are that the players and the NFLPA have pushed back hard against it, because they don't want to have to live overseas and be jet-lagged for half of their games.
Goodell delenda est.
posted by Etrigan at 6:22 AM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
Oh, it has. Roger Goodell has been pushing for a London team for a while.
In addition to the points raised above about its relative popularity, reports are that the players and the NFLPA have pushed back hard against it, because they don't want to have to live overseas and be jet-lagged for half of their games.
Goodell delenda est.
posted by Etrigan at 6:22 AM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
The Raiders should just invest in a bunch of motorhomes and show up at random stadiums throughout the league to play their games.
posted by drezdn at 6:32 AM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by drezdn at 6:32 AM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
Not surprising, really. When I lived in St Louis, it seemed like very few people had shits to give about the Rams.
One of my favorite Rams stories: My wife and I were supposed to meet another couple for a Rams game. After a weak attempt at some tail gaiting, I got a text from my friends saying they couldn't make it, and to sell their tickets if I could. Rather than bother trying to find a buyer, I just stuck the two tickets under the windshield wiper of my car, figuring somebody would help themselves. After the game we went back to the car, and instead of seeing the tickets were gone, they were still there with an additional two tickets that some stranger had left behind.
Ladies and gentlemen, your St Louis Rams.
posted by slogger at 6:33 AM on January 13, 2016 [54 favorites]
One of my favorite Rams stories: My wife and I were supposed to meet another couple for a Rams game. After a weak attempt at some tail gaiting, I got a text from my friends saying they couldn't make it, and to sell their tickets if I could. Rather than bother trying to find a buyer, I just stuck the two tickets under the windshield wiper of my car, figuring somebody would help themselves. After the game we went back to the car, and instead of seeing the tickets were gone, they were still there with an additional two tickets that some stranger had left behind.
Ladies and gentlemen, your St Louis Rams.
posted by slogger at 6:33 AM on January 13, 2016 [54 favorites]
The rumor of the Raiders moving to San Antonio just makes sense, as future fans would only have to slightly modify Spurs gear.
posted by drezdn at 6:36 AM on January 13, 2016
posted by drezdn at 6:36 AM on January 13, 2016
The big plus is that Inglewood is not being publicly financed. It's actually being built by the billionaire owner like a lot of us have been saying stadiums should. Whatever else is going on, that's a step forward and I like it.
Well, maybe a step forward for football fans, not necessarily a step forward for Inglewood itself.
posted by blucevalo at 6:45 AM on January 13, 2016
Well, maybe a step forward for football fans, not necessarily a step forward for Inglewood itself.
posted by blucevalo at 6:45 AM on January 13, 2016
As a taxpayer who works in the public sector in Missouri, I was SO HAPPY to hear this news. I know it can be seen as a win for Kroenke, and I'm sorry, Los Angeles, but we already have plenty of Kroenke around these parts (he owns a big chunk of the commercial property in my town). I was becoming certain that they would build him another cathedral of gold with public funding while schools and roads crumble into dust, and it was making me irrational with rage. I was surprised and pleased beyond belief to hear this news.
posted by aabbbiee at 6:53 AM on January 13, 2016 [6 favorites]
posted by aabbbiee at 6:53 AM on January 13, 2016 [6 favorites]
Ok, so this is a topic that is somewhat near and dear to my heart, not the Rams, St. Louis, or LA, but the resulting broadcast maps that ensue. The506 used to be my go to resource for what zones were playing what game when it was critical to my job (showing regular season week 1 game maps. See, each team has a designated home DMA and then there's this whole set of rules as to who gets to broadcast what and when, based on ticket sales and who else is important to your market.
LA has had a special place because no team was there, so it could get any game it wanted. That changes with this deal. (also noted by the506). LA's going to lose access to almost every big doubleheader game, especially if both move.
Now, this isn't a designated team zone - that's actually different, but its a start. The other thing you have to consider is that you take a pin, put it in the center of the stadium and then run a 75 mile circle around it and every state you cross is one that an official sponsor of the given team can market in. Caveats on that incude when two circles intersect there's a line drawn between the point of bisection (which makes Met Life and Gillette have to split a bit of Conneticut as well as a whole host of other little things. So with that in mind, LA has maintained this 75mile circle around it where no team has been allowed to declare it their city and market to it for quite some time. Its like its had a team placeholder since they lost their team in 1994. Honestly its pretty bonkers. Anyway.
Basically, I used to have to cross the Nielsen ratings, with the TV markets, see the overlap of a given team, and figure out which teams fans were a better resource to market to, who was a better partnership, and otherwise figure out which team was going to carry the hopes and dreams of our company across the finish line in a given year! Who cared whether they scored? I just cared whether I got paid! (not actually true, I liked the teams and the games. But - it was a different sort of moneyball which goes on in professional sports)
posted by Nanukthedog at 6:55 AM on January 13, 2016 [9 favorites]
LA has had a special place because no team was there, so it could get any game it wanted. That changes with this deal. (also noted by the506). LA's going to lose access to almost every big doubleheader game, especially if both move.
Now, this isn't a designated team zone - that's actually different, but its a start. The other thing you have to consider is that you take a pin, put it in the center of the stadium and then run a 75 mile circle around it and every state you cross is one that an official sponsor of the given team can market in. Caveats on that incude when two circles intersect there's a line drawn between the point of bisection (which makes Met Life and Gillette have to split a bit of Conneticut as well as a whole host of other little things. So with that in mind, LA has maintained this 75mile circle around it where no team has been allowed to declare it their city and market to it for quite some time. Its like its had a team placeholder since they lost their team in 1994. Honestly its pretty bonkers. Anyway.
Basically, I used to have to cross the Nielsen ratings, with the TV markets, see the overlap of a given team, and figure out which teams fans were a better resource to market to, who was a better partnership, and otherwise figure out which team was going to carry the hopes and dreams of our company across the finish line in a given year! Who cared whether they scored? I just cared whether I got paid! (not actually true, I liked the teams and the games. But - it was a different sort of moneyball which goes on in professional sports)
posted by Nanukthedog at 6:55 AM on January 13, 2016 [9 favorites]
Nanukthedog raises a good point about TV lock-ins and mandatory games -- in favor of selling 80,000 (160,000 if the Chargers move too) tickets a week, the NFL has pissed off 12 million people who are used to getting the biggest NFL games on TV every week because they didn't have to watch a team with 11 straight losing seasons in a division with one total Super Bowl ring in this milennium.
posted by Etrigan at 7:26 AM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Etrigan at 7:26 AM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
the nfl also owns the (incredibly overpriced) network that "solves" that problem...
posted by nadawi at 7:42 AM on January 13, 2016
posted by nadawi at 7:42 AM on January 13, 2016
if you ever find yourself wanting to watch a game not in your home market, and you're by a computer (with adblock), hit me up - i have a couple links that can help.
posted by nadawi at 7:42 AM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by nadawi at 7:42 AM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
Kroenke is a scumbag but the Rams belong in LA.
In the sense that they're originally from Cleveland, left for L.A. as soon as they won an NFL championship, and have spent their entire history with a "For Sale To Highest Bidder" sign hanging on the front door, sure, they absolutely belong in L.A.
posted by Etrigan at 7:53 AM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
In the sense that they're originally from Cleveland, left for L.A. as soon as they won an NFL championship, and have spent their entire history with a "For Sale To Highest Bidder" sign hanging on the front door, sure, they absolutely belong in L.A.
posted by Etrigan at 7:53 AM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
The thing is, most of the world doesn't really care for NFL. Football (soccer) is the top game throughout the world and although it's become bloated corporate nonsense in many ways, at least it takes place at many levels in many countries, with local people at least potentially having some kind of attachment to teams they see play. This gives rise to meaningful tournaments between countries, or between teams from different countries like the World Cup, European Championship, Champions League, Copa América and Copa Libertadores.
I'm not sure that getting spectators in to NFL is going to be an attractive proposition in cities with big football clubs. Sports fans have a finite disposable income after all, even though it may not seem so at times.
The other thing is that typically soccer clubs are organic institutions that started small in their communities and over time grew and became expressions of local pride, often with political connotations (see Barca vs Real in Spain, or Roma vs Lazio in Italy). Typically the leagues have many levels with promotion and relegation between them based on results (famously the Football Pyramid in England which has around 20 or so levels) - in theory your local tiny club could gradually improve over the years and get more money and buy better players etc and go all the way to the Champion's League final. The only notable example of a soccer team moving was Wimbledon, and that was widely regarded as treachery and the distruction of the club, despite only going 56 miles away. Some clubs are owned by their supporters. Many (especially) Mediterranean clubs are multi-sport, for example Barcelona also play basketball, rugby, and ice hockey.
This is completely at odds with the franchise model of American sport, where the teams are mobile to an extent and the league runs everything and tries to manage things through drafts etc.
posted by kersplunk at 8:00 AM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
I'm not sure that getting spectators in to NFL is going to be an attractive proposition in cities with big football clubs. Sports fans have a finite disposable income after all, even though it may not seem so at times.
The other thing is that typically soccer clubs are organic institutions that started small in their communities and over time grew and became expressions of local pride, often with political connotations (see Barca vs Real in Spain, or Roma vs Lazio in Italy). Typically the leagues have many levels with promotion and relegation between them based on results (famously the Football Pyramid in England which has around 20 or so levels) - in theory your local tiny club could gradually improve over the years and get more money and buy better players etc and go all the way to the Champion's League final. The only notable example of a soccer team moving was Wimbledon, and that was widely regarded as treachery and the distruction of the club, despite only going 56 miles away. Some clubs are owned by their supporters. Many (especially) Mediterranean clubs are multi-sport, for example Barcelona also play basketball, rugby, and ice hockey.
This is completely at odds with the franchise model of American sport, where the teams are mobile to an extent and the league runs everything and tries to manage things through drafts etc.
posted by kersplunk at 8:00 AM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
Who voted against it and why?
It isn't public, but probably Mark Davis (Raiders), because he was upset that his move request clearly wasn't getting approved; and possibly Mike Brown (Bengals), because more money into the NFL means a higher salary cap.
posted by Etrigan at 8:25 AM on January 13, 2016
It isn't public, but probably Mark Davis (Raiders), because he was upset that his move request clearly wasn't getting approved; and possibly Mike Brown (Bengals), because more money into the NFL means a higher salary cap.
posted by Etrigan at 8:25 AM on January 13, 2016
My question is, as a St. Louis native living in Seattle, can we put an MLS team in the EJ Dome*? I know that there have been exhibition games played in Busch Stadium, including part of the Women's World Cup Victory Tour, which is fine until baseball season. I know STL has a third-tier team, and that's cool, but I want MLS in my hometown.** It's sad that a city with such a history of soccer doesn't have a proper soccer team.
* Is it the Edward Jones Dome still? I leave town for nine years and I forget what everything's called, and I revert back to the TWA Dome and the Kiel Center...
** I'd be splitting my attention between the Sounders and STLFC, but still!
posted by gc at 8:35 AM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
* Is it the Edward Jones Dome still? I leave town for nine years and I forget what everything's called, and I revert back to the TWA Dome and the Kiel Center...
** I'd be splitting my attention between the Sounders and STLFC, but still!
posted by gc at 8:35 AM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
As a San Diego native, I'm proud of my hometown's refusal (well, inability to agree on any one proposal) to provide significant public funding for a new stadium. I grew up with the Chargers - Natrone Means Business, Marion Butts, Junior Seau, Stan Humphries and the '94 team, Bobby Ross, Drew Brees, LaDanian Tomlinson, Antonio Gates, the whole business. I will shed no tears when they move. It's a bit of a complicated business, as the Chargers do serve a significant economic role for the city, but fuck you Dean Spanos. And fuck the NFL as a whole, especially Goodell. Quit ripping off the public, downplaying and obfuscating the concussion issue, turning a blind eye to PEDs (lookin at you Peyton), employing and defending wife and child beaters, and then maybe we'll talk.
I'm a cord-cutter, but in a hotel room this past weekend I managed to catch a bit of pregame show before the Vikings game. Bob Costas prefaced his interview with Adrian Peterson by essentially saying, "If we had enough time to do the issue justice, we'd talk about the charges that Peterson beat his son with a switch. Since we don't have enough time, we'll just talk about today's game." Way to be a slimy fucker, Bob. Just come right out and say it. We don't want to jeopardize our relationship with the NFL, so we won't do any reporting on felony charges for child abuse by one of their star players.
posted by Existential Dread at 8:39 AM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
I'm a cord-cutter, but in a hotel room this past weekend I managed to catch a bit of pregame show before the Vikings game. Bob Costas prefaced his interview with Adrian Peterson by essentially saying, "If we had enough time to do the issue justice, we'd talk about the charges that Peterson beat his son with a switch. Since we don't have enough time, we'll just talk about today's game." Way to be a slimy fucker, Bob. Just come right out and say it. We don't want to jeopardize our relationship with the NFL, so we won't do any reporting on felony charges for child abuse by one of their star players.
posted by Existential Dread at 8:39 AM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
"If we had enough time to do the issue justice, we'd talk about the charges that Peterson beat his son with a switch. Since we don't have enough time, we'll just talk about today's game." Way to be a slimy fucker, Bob. Just come right out and say it. We don't want to jeopardize our relationship with the NFL, so we won't do any reporting on felony charges for child abuse by one of their star players.
Yeah, that sounds to me more like he's mentioning it after being told not to. Saying "the charges that Peterson beat his son with a switch," not "the allegations against Peterson" or similar tiptoe around the issue phrasing is a deliberate choice. Costas is a seasoned broadcaster. He knows what he's doing.
posted by everybody had matching towels at 8:57 AM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
Yeah, that sounds to me more like he's mentioning it after being told not to. Saying "the charges that Peterson beat his son with a switch," not "the allegations against Peterson" or similar tiptoe around the issue phrasing is a deliberate choice. Costas is a seasoned broadcaster. He knows what he's doing.
posted by everybody had matching towels at 8:57 AM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
Is it the Edward Jones Dome still?
Yup. And Kiel/Savvis is Scottrade Center.
posted by Foosnark at 8:57 AM on January 13, 2016
Yup. And Kiel/Savvis is Scottrade Center.
posted by Foosnark at 8:57 AM on January 13, 2016
This is all wrong. Teams that move to LA need to have a name that his highly connected to where they're no longer located, like the Minneapolis Lakers or the Brooklyn Trolley Dodgers.
posted by ckape at 9:21 AM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by ckape at 9:21 AM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
Teams that move to LA need to have a name that his highly connected to where they're no longer located, like the Minneapolis Lakers or the Brooklyn Trolley Dodgers.
The Rams were initially named for the Fordham Rams, at the time one of the pre-eminent college teams. Yes, a Cleveland team took its name from a school in New York City before decamping to Los Angeles. Seems perfect.
posted by Etrigan at 9:31 AM on January 13, 2016
The Rams were initially named for the Fordham Rams, at the time one of the pre-eminent college teams. Yes, a Cleveland team took its name from a school in New York City before decamping to Los Angeles. Seems perfect.
posted by Etrigan at 9:31 AM on January 13, 2016
My question is, as a St. Louis native living in Seattle, can we put an MLS team in the EJ Dome
MLS is outdoors only, I believe.
Who voted against it and why?
Clark Hunt, the owner of the Chiefs, previously came out publicly against relocation.
posted by Jacob G at 10:28 AM on January 13, 2016
MLS is outdoors only, I believe.
Who voted against it and why?
Clark Hunt, the owner of the Chiefs, previously came out publicly against relocation.
posted by Jacob G at 10:28 AM on January 13, 2016
MLS is outdoors only, I believe.
Vancouver plays inside the retractable-roofed BC Place, Montreal plays big-draw games in Olympic Stadium, and a few other MLS stadiums use artificial turf.
The biggest concern MLS would have with using the EJ Dome is probably revenue-sharing.
posted by cardboard at 11:16 AM on January 13, 2016
Vancouver plays inside the retractable-roofed BC Place, Montreal plays big-draw games in Olympic Stadium, and a few other MLS stadiums use artificial turf.
The biggest concern MLS would have with using the EJ Dome is probably revenue-sharing.
posted by cardboard at 11:16 AM on January 13, 2016
Pro sports teams are like a cancer on the cities they inhabit except in Green Bay.
FTFY
posted by carmicha at 11:30 AM on January 13, 2016
FTFY
posted by carmicha at 11:30 AM on January 13, 2016
Pro sports teams are like a cancer on the cities they inhabit except in Green Bay.Brown County had a 0.5% sales tax for fifteen years to support the stadium. Just because a large bunch of people own the Packers doesn't mean that uninterested people aren't forced to support what is still essentially a private enterprise.
FTFY
posted by Talez at 11:38 AM on January 13, 2016
Brown County had a 0.5% sales tax for fifteen years to support the stadium.
Which the people of Brown County voted for, and about which even a guy who opposed the tax has said "I think the community actually, probably, came out okay as well."
posted by Etrigan at 11:45 AM on January 13, 2016
Which the people of Brown County voted for, and about which even a guy who opposed the tax has said "I think the community actually, probably, came out okay as well."
posted by Etrigan at 11:45 AM on January 13, 2016
Drinky Die: "I want the A's back. I would instantly totally abandon the Phillies if they moved back."
Rebuild Shibe Park!
posted by Chrysostom at 11:50 AM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
Rebuild Shibe Park!
posted by Chrysostom at 11:50 AM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
As a fan of old dumb throwaway jokes, I'm ok with this.
I'm honestly surprised the NFL hasn't tried to expand internationally more than it has
Unless the NFL has plans to buy and operate a Concorde to quickly move players and staff from London to NY, an European expansion is out of the cards... and that's just part one of the logistics nightmare.
Then, the NFL Europe had one problem - virtually unknown players. It could have more success if it was treated like a proper development league - say, a team would get cap bonuses if they allowed their bottom roster/PS talent (or, hey, rotation players, if you feel like gambling) play for a couple of months on Europe, as well as, for instance, giving a cap waiver to free agents also willing to play for two months on the previous year. It would be more attractive than watching Div III / US national American football team talent. And assume it might well be a money-losing proposition.
I know some hardcore football fans, but only a few of them would get up to watch the Cleveland Browns play the London Chavs on the Ocho at 3 in the morning.
Hardcore european fans already do it, if the Chavs played a SNF/MNF/TNF/TNA on the US (of course, night games would be a no-no because watching a game on the couch from 1 to 5 am is one thing, going to a stadium is another, and I'm sure there are even noise laws against that). Games on the UK would be scheduled for 6:00 pm / 9:00 pm GMT for your 1:00pm / 4:00pm ET games.
The other thing is that typically soccer clubs are organic institutions that started small in their communities and over time grew and became expressions of local pride
Also a matter of scales. Some 13 years ago, FCPorto had a major falling out with the Mayor when developing the new ground, particularly of the balance between service/commercial and residential development on the old stadium grounds and along the avenue that was opened (context: Porto East is a major, major shithole, and there are always plans to bring it back to life that hahaha), and there was a threat to move the stadium across the river to Gaia, which is about 4 or 5 miles (if it was on the team training facilities) and totally unacceptable for many to the point everyone saw it as a bluff. The perfectly normal (by US standards) 49ers move to Santa Clara - about 45 miles - could put Porto neighbouring almost half of the top division teams (seven plus Boavista, who are already across town). Visiting all five major stadiums used by Porto (two in operation, two demolished, one unsure) since the beginnings is like a 3 mile trip.
Costas is a seasoned broadcaster. He knows what he's doing.
Costas wasn't afraid to hit hard on some topics NBC and the NFL wouldn't want to be associated with (I recall him speaking out for the gun problem after the Belcher murder-suicide, as well as concussions). While I haven't saw the interview, I really think this was his way of remembering why the leading rusher spent late 2014 looking at a TV screen on Sundays, particularly when compared to the childish reactions to the Peyton Manning HGH scandal of other sports pundits.
posted by lmfsilva at 11:56 AM on January 13, 2016
I'm honestly surprised the NFL hasn't tried to expand internationally more than it has
Unless the NFL has plans to buy and operate a Concorde to quickly move players and staff from London to NY, an European expansion is out of the cards... and that's just part one of the logistics nightmare.
Then, the NFL Europe had one problem - virtually unknown players. It could have more success if it was treated like a proper development league - say, a team would get cap bonuses if they allowed their bottom roster/PS talent (or, hey, rotation players, if you feel like gambling) play for a couple of months on Europe, as well as, for instance, giving a cap waiver to free agents also willing to play for two months on the previous year. It would be more attractive than watching Div III / US national American football team talent. And assume it might well be a money-losing proposition.
I know some hardcore football fans, but only a few of them would get up to watch the Cleveland Browns play the London Chavs on the Ocho at 3 in the morning.
Hardcore european fans already do it, if the Chavs played a SNF/MNF/TNF/TNA on the US (of course, night games would be a no-no because watching a game on the couch from 1 to 5 am is one thing, going to a stadium is another, and I'm sure there are even noise laws against that). Games on the UK would be scheduled for 6:00 pm / 9:00 pm GMT for your 1:00pm / 4:00pm ET games.
The other thing is that typically soccer clubs are organic institutions that started small in their communities and over time grew and became expressions of local pride
Also a matter of scales. Some 13 years ago, FCPorto had a major falling out with the Mayor when developing the new ground, particularly of the balance between service/commercial and residential development on the old stadium grounds and along the avenue that was opened (context: Porto East is a major, major shithole, and there are always plans to bring it back to life that hahaha), and there was a threat to move the stadium across the river to Gaia, which is about 4 or 5 miles (if it was on the team training facilities) and totally unacceptable for many to the point everyone saw it as a bluff. The perfectly normal (by US standards) 49ers move to Santa Clara - about 45 miles - could put Porto neighbouring almost half of the top division teams (seven plus Boavista, who are already across town). Visiting all five major stadiums used by Porto (two in operation, two demolished, one unsure) since the beginnings is like a 3 mile trip.
Costas is a seasoned broadcaster. He knows what he's doing.
Costas wasn't afraid to hit hard on some topics NBC and the NFL wouldn't want to be associated with (I recall him speaking out for the gun problem after the Belcher murder-suicide, as well as concussions). While I haven't saw the interview, I really think this was his way of remembering why the leading rusher spent late 2014 looking at a TV screen on Sundays, particularly when compared to the childish reactions to the Peyton Manning HGH scandal of other sports pundits.
posted by lmfsilva at 11:56 AM on January 13, 2016
The Torture Isn't Over Yet For Chargers And Raiders Fans
posted by Chrysostom at 12:14 PM on January 13, 2016
posted by Chrysostom at 12:14 PM on January 13, 2016
Do all you pro sports haters have any idea how much revenue they generate in the community?
posted by Windopaene at 1:50 PM on January 13, 2016
posted by Windopaene at 1:50 PM on January 13, 2016
In St. Louis, at least, the people who are making the money are not the people whose community is being ruined by the stadium they'd need to keep the Rams. It's worth thinking critically about who benefits from what, and who bears the negatives.
posted by ChuraChura at 2:19 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by ChuraChura at 2:19 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
IIRC, it's not much because people end up spending their disposable income on something regardless.
posted by Drinky Die at 2:20 PM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Drinky Die at 2:20 PM on January 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
That venue will compete with Staples and the convention center downtown for events, concerts, conventions, meetings, et cetera. Except the scale of the thing, and the bona fides that come with being an NFL facility, will dwarf what AEG has built downtown.
What? Eight days a year?
posted by JackFlash at 2:36 PM on January 13, 2016
What? Eight days a year?
posted by JackFlash at 2:36 PM on January 13, 2016
Yeah, pretty much all independent studies looking at the economic impact of stadiums have concluded that pro sports don't really help the economy more than any other entertainment option would (and all those other entertainment options don't require millions of dollars for a publicly-funded stadium).
And I say this as a pro-sports lover, and someone deeply sympathetic to St. Louis Rams fans as I watched the same thing happen to my Sonics years ago. But just because I like the Sonics and my other sports team doesn't mean I should buy into the propaganda these guys put out that their stadiums are worth the public dollars, because there has been no evidence of that found anywhere really.
posted by john-a-dreams at 2:50 PM on January 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
And I say this as a pro-sports lover, and someone deeply sympathetic to St. Louis Rams fans as I watched the same thing happen to my Sonics years ago. But just because I like the Sonics and my other sports team doesn't mean I should buy into the propaganda these guys put out that their stadiums are worth the public dollars, because there has been no evidence of that found anywhere really.
posted by john-a-dreams at 2:50 PM on January 13, 2016 [4 favorites]
Do all you pro sports haters have any idea how much revenue they generate in the community?
I don't really follow football at all, but I've absolutely enjoy catching the odd Raiders game at my local bar when they're on. It's not about pro sports. It's about a malignant organization using the economic precariousness of its various host cities to secure ridiculous fiscal concessions. The only arguments I've seen that stadiums generate wealth in the communities they're built are just cargo-culted trickle-down theories in disguise, and they somehow manage to be even more nakedly born of avarice and ignorance than the original Reaganomics incarnation. So what you got?
posted by invitapriore at 3:19 PM on January 13, 2016
I don't really follow football at all, but I've absolutely enjoy catching the odd Raiders game at my local bar when they're on. It's not about pro sports. It's about a malignant organization using the economic precariousness of its various host cities to secure ridiculous fiscal concessions. The only arguments I've seen that stadiums generate wealth in the communities they're built are just cargo-culted trickle-down theories in disguise, and they somehow manage to be even more nakedly born of avarice and ignorance than the original Reaganomics incarnation. So what you got?
posted by invitapriore at 3:19 PM on January 13, 2016
Do all you pro sports haters have any idea how much revenue they generate in the community?
I know! Call today and you too can spend over half a billion dollars of public money to build a stadium and create literally dozens of minimum wage part-time jobs! Act now and we'll also show you how to keep all naming rights, concession, and ticket revenue while paying a pittance in rent! For our first three callers we'll also include the ultimate guide to forcing cities to make pricey capital improvements during the lease for only PENNIES ON THE DOLLAR! For the next 20 minutes only we'll also include a convenient pamphlet containg secrets on how to get valuable concessions for corporate bigwigs during the hosting of major events and not pay a single penny!
A deal like this cannot possibly last so start your NFL team today!
posted by Talez at 3:36 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
I know! Call today and you too can spend over half a billion dollars of public money to build a stadium and create literally dozens of minimum wage part-time jobs! Act now and we'll also show you how to keep all naming rights, concession, and ticket revenue while paying a pittance in rent! For our first three callers we'll also include the ultimate guide to forcing cities to make pricey capital improvements during the lease for only PENNIES ON THE DOLLAR! For the next 20 minutes only we'll also include a convenient pamphlet containg secrets on how to get valuable concessions for corporate bigwigs during the hosting of major events and not pay a single penny!
A deal like this cannot possibly last so start your NFL team today!
posted by Talez at 3:36 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
I went googling for a study on economic impact of pro sports (which is futile I know since it's only marxist economists who are going to put their name on that) and I got sidetracked by this think progress graphic on how much money Alabama Clemson made and how much the players got.
Everyone Is Set To Cash In On The National Championship Game, Except The Athletes Playing In It
posted by bukvich at 4:31 PM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
Everyone Is Set To Cash In On The National Championship Game, Except The Athletes Playing In It
posted by bukvich at 4:31 PM on January 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
Except not all stadiums are built with 500 million dollars of public money.
And which "similar enterprises" are going to be filling 50,000+ Seat venues consistently, and the attendant food/drink/parking.
The owners are scum generally, but y'all are overstating a lot of the bad, and ignoring the good.
posted by Windopaene at 4:58 PM on January 13, 2016
And which "similar enterprises" are going to be filling 50,000+ Seat venues consistently, and the attendant food/drink/parking.
The owners are scum generally, but y'all are overstating a lot of the bad, and ignoring the good.
posted by Windopaene at 4:58 PM on January 13, 2016
What? Eight days a year?
I haven't seen the details on the project, but the Wikipedia writeup indicates the facility is going to host a lot more than a score of football games every year. Kroenke would be throwing his money away otherwise, which is possible, but not likely.
posted by notyou at 5:06 PM on January 13, 2016
I haven't seen the details on the project, but the Wikipedia writeup indicates the facility is going to host a lot more than a score of football games every year. Kroenke would be throwing his money away otherwise, which is possible, but not likely.
posted by notyou at 5:06 PM on January 13, 2016
The NFL basically wants to build NFL Disneyland I think. The LA project isn't the same as most stadium projects.
And which "similar enterprises" are going to be filling 50,000+ Seat venues consistently, and the attendant food/drink/parking.
Instead of one 50,000 seat money vacuum people spend their money at businesses all over. They don't decide to just put their money in the bank because there isn't a game to go to. Think about the parking, for example. Think how many 365 day a year small businesses or homes you could fit in the parking space at the South Philadelphia Sports Complex. That is better for the community than one billionaire sucking up all the entertainment money.
(But if you are going to be a sports town, at least Philly does it right and puts those venues together in the same area so the parking spaces get a lot of use.)
posted by Drinky Die at 5:14 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
And which "similar enterprises" are going to be filling 50,000+ Seat venues consistently, and the attendant food/drink/parking.
Instead of one 50,000 seat money vacuum people spend their money at businesses all over. They don't decide to just put their money in the bank because there isn't a game to go to. Think about the parking, for example. Think how many 365 day a year small businesses or homes you could fit in the parking space at the South Philadelphia Sports Complex. That is better for the community than one billionaire sucking up all the entertainment money.
(But if you are going to be a sports town, at least Philly does it right and puts those venues together in the same area so the parking spaces get a lot of use.)
posted by Drinky Die at 5:14 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
the Wikipedia writeup indicates the facility is going to host a lot more than a score of football games every year.
As the Wikipedia writeup you refer to says "Citation needed." That's what every stadium proponent has said about every football stadium in history. They never live up to the hype.
And I assume you know the meaning of the word score. So far there is only one football team scheduled for the stadium. Eight regular games and a couple of exhibitions a year.
posted by JackFlash at 5:22 PM on January 13, 2016
As the Wikipedia writeup you refer to says "Citation needed." That's what every stadium proponent has said about every football stadium in history. They never live up to the hype.
And I assume you know the meaning of the word score. So far there is only one football team scheduled for the stadium. Eight regular games and a couple of exhibitions a year.
posted by JackFlash at 5:22 PM on January 13, 2016
Except not all stadiums are built with 500 million dollars of public money.
Indianapolis, $620 million
Minneapolis, $678 million
San Diego?
The current plan which the Chargers knocked back involved $300 million from the Chargers, $200 million from the NFL, $173 million in construction bonds, $121 million from the city of San Diego, $121 million from San Diego County, and $225 million from the sale of Qualcomm Stadium owned by... The City of San Diego.
Public cost: $467m.
Cobb County is positively in value town "only" dumping in $397m into their stadium.
posted by Talez at 5:44 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
Indianapolis, $620 million
Minneapolis, $678 million
San Diego?
The current plan which the Chargers knocked back involved $300 million from the Chargers, $200 million from the NFL, $173 million in construction bonds, $121 million from the city of San Diego, $121 million from San Diego County, and $225 million from the sale of Qualcomm Stadium owned by... The City of San Diego.
Public cost: $467m.
Cobb County is positively in value town "only" dumping in $397m into their stadium.
posted by Talez at 5:44 PM on January 13, 2016 [2 favorites]
Yeah, a score is 20. I'm assuming the Chargers will join the Rams, like I read in the papers. But maybe they won't!
Look, I think Kroenke and the whole rest of NFL ownership are vile criminals, same as every other right thinking person does. But since he's putting gobs of his own (no doubt ill-gotten) money into this project, I'm guessing he's eager to get it back, and then some, via the creation an NFL Disneyland, as Drinky Die calls it, with room for boring stuff like conventions and restaurants and IMAXes.
Heck, the venue he's leaving was a convention space when it wasn't a football stadium.
More details on the project. It's massive, and includes much more than the stadium (which is, of course, the centerpiece).
But from your lips to God's ear: maybe this'll flop and he'll lose all the money he's spending on it.
posted by notyou at 7:25 PM on January 13, 2016
Look, I think Kroenke and the whole rest of NFL ownership are vile criminals, same as every other right thinking person does. But since he's putting gobs of his own (no doubt ill-gotten) money into this project, I'm guessing he's eager to get it back, and then some, via the creation an NFL Disneyland, as Drinky Die calls it, with room for boring stuff like conventions and restaurants and IMAXes.
Heck, the venue he's leaving was a convention space when it wasn't a football stadium.
More details on the project. It's massive, and includes much more than the stadium (which is, of course, the centerpiece).
But from your lips to God's ear: maybe this'll flop and he'll lose all the money he's spending on it.
posted by notyou at 7:25 PM on January 13, 2016
For all sports but especially in the case of football, stadiums tend to have a deleterious effect on the neighborhoods around them. Although often the elected representatives who use public funds to pay for private stadiums use the revitalization of the neighborhood around the stadium as a justification, arguing that area businesses will benefit from the influx of sports fans, the problem is that all of this new demand is hyperconcentrated in time — eight times a year 50,000 people flood into the neighborhood, but for the rest of the year there's no significant increase in business.
This is the worst possible situation to build a business around. Bars and restaurants that sit empty most of the time are a few times a year filled to overcapacity (and therefore deeply unpleasant to be in) for a few hours before and after the game. This brings in some money, sure, but it's simply not possible in a brick-and-mortar facility to pay the rent for the year based on a few surges. Paradoxically, the crowds themselves turn away business — if the same amount of people visit an area over a larger span of time, almost certainly more of them will patronize any given business in that area, because none of them will have occasion to think "ugh, I'm not going in there, it's too crowded."
The effect is less bad in the case of baseball, simply because there's so many games, but even in the case of baseball stadiums typically don't bring in enough business to pay the rent for businesses around them (this is why stadium districts on the whole tend to be kind of raggedy).
The problem with running a neighborhood off of infrequent surges of customers goes beyond sports stadiums. Jane Jacobs has a great analysis in her famous Death and Life of Great American Cities of why downtown Manhattan has always been sort of a miserable place. Because of the hyperconcentration of office workers there, most businesses have to configure themselves around processing the massive, massive surge of business they get around lunchtime, and because (until very, very recently) basically no one lived there, there wasn't demand for really much of anything at all after work hours.
And well in empirical terms (I defer to any actual urban planners here; I've seen the figures but don't know where to dig them up), stadiums basically never bring in enough tax revenue to cover the amount paid by the municipality.
If you're looking for justification for why cities pay to bring in sports teams, you have to think in non-market terms. Basically, the only way they make sense is if the city, as represented by their elected officials, is deeply interested in being able to see top-notch professional sports in person in their cities. Think of it as something analogous to the theater — just like it's only possible to really see a Broadway play in Manhattan, likewise, it's only possible to watch professional sports in person if you're in a city with a professional sports team.
The city doesn't just have to be interested, though, they have to be sufficiently interested to pay the required ransom to the owners of the companies that exclusively employ top-notch professional athletes. I have tremendous respect for the team owners for the strength of the cartel that they've set up. I didn't really realize how powerful that cartel was until the NBA Board of Governors voted against allowing a privately funded stadium deal in large part to avoid setting the precedent of allowing teams to build stadiums without public money.
Given that there are significantly more serious demands on the money in municipal budgets, I don't think the benefit of being able to see professional sports in one's city is worth the cost (same goes, for that matter, for the benefit of being able to see top-notch professional theater or hear top-notch professional orchestras). Opinions differ on all of those things, of course — the point is, when considering whether or not it's worth it to give money to the ownership groups of professional sports teams, we must be clearheaded about how professional sports operations are a cost, in economic terms, rather than a revenue generator.
In broader terms, and feel free to ignore this if you're bored of Internet Bolshevism, given the aforementioned demands on the budgets of cities, it is a mistake to use city money to support any business whatsoever. Instead, city money should be used for genuinely public services, and beyond that channeled to the poorest residents of those cities by whatever means is quickest and most efficient. This is the right thing to do because it's the right thing to do, but it's also the right thing to do because distributing money to the poor more smoothly and efficiently increases demand for business services than any stadium could — the rich can save whatever money they get rather than spending it anywhere, but the poor have to spend their money to eat and find shelter.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 1:49 AM on January 14, 2016 [3 favorites]
This is the worst possible situation to build a business around. Bars and restaurants that sit empty most of the time are a few times a year filled to overcapacity (and therefore deeply unpleasant to be in) for a few hours before and after the game. This brings in some money, sure, but it's simply not possible in a brick-and-mortar facility to pay the rent for the year based on a few surges. Paradoxically, the crowds themselves turn away business — if the same amount of people visit an area over a larger span of time, almost certainly more of them will patronize any given business in that area, because none of them will have occasion to think "ugh, I'm not going in there, it's too crowded."
The effect is less bad in the case of baseball, simply because there's so many games, but even in the case of baseball stadiums typically don't bring in enough business to pay the rent for businesses around them (this is why stadium districts on the whole tend to be kind of raggedy).
The problem with running a neighborhood off of infrequent surges of customers goes beyond sports stadiums. Jane Jacobs has a great analysis in her famous Death and Life of Great American Cities of why downtown Manhattan has always been sort of a miserable place. Because of the hyperconcentration of office workers there, most businesses have to configure themselves around processing the massive, massive surge of business they get around lunchtime, and because (until very, very recently) basically no one lived there, there wasn't demand for really much of anything at all after work hours.
And well in empirical terms (I defer to any actual urban planners here; I've seen the figures but don't know where to dig them up), stadiums basically never bring in enough tax revenue to cover the amount paid by the municipality.
If you're looking for justification for why cities pay to bring in sports teams, you have to think in non-market terms. Basically, the only way they make sense is if the city, as represented by their elected officials, is deeply interested in being able to see top-notch professional sports in person in their cities. Think of it as something analogous to the theater — just like it's only possible to really see a Broadway play in Manhattan, likewise, it's only possible to watch professional sports in person if you're in a city with a professional sports team.
The city doesn't just have to be interested, though, they have to be sufficiently interested to pay the required ransom to the owners of the companies that exclusively employ top-notch professional athletes. I have tremendous respect for the team owners for the strength of the cartel that they've set up. I didn't really realize how powerful that cartel was until the NBA Board of Governors voted against allowing a privately funded stadium deal in large part to avoid setting the precedent of allowing teams to build stadiums without public money.
Given that there are significantly more serious demands on the money in municipal budgets, I don't think the benefit of being able to see professional sports in one's city is worth the cost (same goes, for that matter, for the benefit of being able to see top-notch professional theater or hear top-notch professional orchestras). Opinions differ on all of those things, of course — the point is, when considering whether or not it's worth it to give money to the ownership groups of professional sports teams, we must be clearheaded about how professional sports operations are a cost, in economic terms, rather than a revenue generator.
In broader terms, and feel free to ignore this if you're bored of Internet Bolshevism, given the aforementioned demands on the budgets of cities, it is a mistake to use city money to support any business whatsoever. Instead, city money should be used for genuinely public services, and beyond that channeled to the poorest residents of those cities by whatever means is quickest and most efficient. This is the right thing to do because it's the right thing to do, but it's also the right thing to do because distributing money to the poor more smoothly and efficiently increases demand for business services than any stadium could — the rich can save whatever money they get rather than spending it anywhere, but the poor have to spend their money to eat and find shelter.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 1:49 AM on January 14, 2016 [3 favorites]
In the darkest timeline, the St Louis Stallions are aiming for their 5th Super Bowl victory in the past 15 years, and the New England Rams are heading back to LA.
posted by Rock Steady at 5:56 AM on January 14, 2016
posted by Rock Steady at 5:56 AM on January 14, 2016
I don't find myself linking to The Heartland Institute very often, and haven't read every one of these links in detail, but this page is a run-down of various analyses showing that the benefits of public stadium financing are often illusory. The last link has a bit about how stadium boosters often juke the stats to make it sound like the stadiums are creating economic benefits:
posted by tonycpsu at 6:20 AM on January 14, 2016
The Mythical MultiplierStadium financing would seem to be one of those issues that pundits are always looking for to unite progressives and libertarian/fiscal conservative types, but it seems like there are enough sports fans on both sides of the spectrum that think with their hearts instead of their heads.
The methodology used by impact studies has been criticized on a variety of grounds. All impact studies use multipliers to estimate the effect of each dollar spent directly on sports on the wider local economy. Critics argue that at best the multipliers used in prospective impact studies overstate the contribution that professional sports make to an area’s economy because they fail to differentiate between net and gross spending and the effects of taxes. In computing the benefits of the investment in a stadium, the appropriate focus is on net benefits, that is, on benefits that would not have occurred in the absence of the stadium. Impact studies rarely consider this issue. One could think of this concern as the substitution effect. Specifically, because of sport and stadium-related activities, other spending declines as people substitute spending on one for spending on the other. If the stadium simply displaces dollar-for-dollar spending that would have occurred otherwise, then there are no net benefits generated. To consider the spending on stadium and sport-related activities as all benefits is, therefore, to widely overstate the value of the investment. A key issue for getting the right sense of the value of the stadium investment is, consequently, how much of stadium-related spending substitutes for otherwise intended spending and how much is net gain in spending.
posted by tonycpsu at 6:20 AM on January 14, 2016
(Just so we're clear, Kroenke's football palace in Inglewood is privately funded, at least for now. There will be some tax breaks from the city to the developers later on, once a tax receipt floor has been reached.)
posted by notyou at 6:57 AM on January 14, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by notyou at 6:57 AM on January 14, 2016 [1 favorite]
I believe the tax breaks they'll receive are for the moment in lieu of the city having to provide infrastructure the private works will be performing themselves like the water, sewer and the like connections underground among the stadium district.
posted by Talez at 7:22 AM on January 14, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Talez at 7:22 AM on January 14, 2016 [1 favorite]
Here's how the LA Times describes the tax expenditures:
The nuance between that statement ["no taxpayer dollars'] — similar claims were made by Inglewood Mayor James Butts — and tax breaks that could reach $100 million lies in the fine print of a 185-page initiative plan filed by the developers earlier this month. It includes two paragraphs of how Inglewood would eventually reimburse the project for the costs of roadwork, utility work and public parks on the nearly 300-acre site. Meany estimated those costs at $60 million. The city would also reimburse costs of security, medical services and shuttles to off-site parking during stadium events, which Butts estimated at about $8 million a year.posted by notyou at 8:09 AM on January 14, 2016 [2 favorites]
These payments would only kick in after the project is generating at least $25 million a year in tax revenue for Inglewood — a city with a general budget of about $86 million — and will only cover things a local government would normally provide, Meany said.
I don't know yet if I like this, but Bill Simmons podcast has over 30 minutes of the St Louis Los Angeles Rams story with Malcom Gladwell. Link.
posted by bukvich at 11:40 AM on January 19, 2016
posted by bukvich at 11:40 AM on January 19, 2016
Peter King with the inside story of the votes.
posted by Etrigan at 12:36 PM on January 20, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Etrigan at 12:36 PM on January 20, 2016 [2 favorites]
The Rams are now the third-most valuable franchise in the NFL
When Forbes released its annual rankings of most valuable NFL franchises back in September, the Rams were ranked 28th.
posted by Drinky Die at 7:09 PM on January 20, 2016
When Forbes released its annual rankings of most valuable NFL franchises back in September, the Rams were ranked 28th.
posted by Drinky Die at 7:09 PM on January 20, 2016
« Older "I had found a steel box in my heart." | The archetype is probably 'Lucky Jim' by Kingsley... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Joey Michaels at 6:37 PM on January 12, 2016 [2 favorites]