What did St. Louis gain with Rams lawsuit? – Press Telegram

When both Rams and Raiders left Southern California before the 1995 season, as far as I can remember, there were no proceedings against the team or the NFL. The general attitude of the region seemed to be:Ah, We made friends with you, we make friends without you. ”

We did that during the 21 football season.

Does hell have the wrath of a city being despised? It depends on the size of the city. Or whether you can get your case before the right judge.

St. Louis City and County and Regional Convention and Sports Complex Authority in case you miss it This week we had a pre-Thanksgiving stormA few months before the NFL, the Rams and owner Stan Kroenke were to be tried in front of a St. Louis jury, with the prospect of revealing dirty laundry in all sorts of leagues. (As if the Washington Football Team’s internal email didn’t do enough damage in 2021).

Missouri City is a $ 790 million rich man paid by the end of Christmas Eve after a settlement between leagues, teams and municipalities was announced on Wednesday. And while there may be a fair amount of internal skirmishes about who is hooking how much of that amount, the League and Rams are undoubtedly reassuring that no one needs to testify under an oath. doing.

Obviously, blackmail can be very profitable.

In summary, Rams has returned to Los Angeles – I prefer to think of it as ownership – the league competes in Carson from the Chargers Dean Spanos, who finally moved to Los Angeles in 2017. After choosing Kroenke’s stadium project in Inglewood over the proposal, it ended up as Kroenke’s tenant, and Mark Davis of the Raiders who took his team to Las Vegas.

Oakland filed a similar proceeding over the departure of the Raiders However, a federal judge dismissed it in the spring of 2020. San Diego probably solved it by putting the face of Spanos on the darts board across the best cities in the United States. The city’s father thought it wasn’t worth the hassle to bring the owner to court.

The St. Louis proceedings filed in 2017 alleged that (a) the league did not follow its own transfer procedures and (b) these procedures corresponded to a contract between the league and the city, not just guidelines. bottom. It didn’t look like there was more weight behind Auckland, but Missouri Circuit Judge Christopher McGraw allowed it to move forward. When he felt forced to order financial information from several NFL owners prior to the trial, some expected potential damages that seemed overly partisan. rice field.

Erwin Kishner, executive chairman and sports law expert at Feinstein LLP, a New York law firm, Quoted by athletics It was “a very one-sided judiciary and the way they decided. That said, if you’re dealing with the district court system and your favorite child or favorite son type is crooked, I In his opinion, this is what is happening here. This (reconciliation) may make sense for that reason. ”

This is another definition of home court advantage.

And don’t forget that St. Louis has opened the door to the movement itself. The dome-shaped stadium, which the late Georgia Frontiere seduced to move the team from Anaheim in 1995, could add after years of ignoring the product, but $ 280 million to build. It cost money. The original lease clause specified that the facility should be maintained and upgraded as needed to remain in the “first tier” of the NFL stadium, essentially the top eight.

By October 2009, when correspondents entered the Rams-Viking match at the Dome, it was clear that the facility was off the first tier as well as the second tier. At that time, he wrote, “It is in good condition but is aging.” “In recent years, there are more new facilities (19 in 14 seasons since the dome opened), so this place is probably not there.” Added. Either way, it’s the top eight. ”

The Convention and Visitors Commission, which ran the dome, proposed a $ 124 million upgrade in 2012. I made it a little sweeter But when Rams offered $ 700 million in improvements and enhancements, it wasn’t too much. The Arbitration Commission, which was asked to choose between two plans to resolve the dispute, chose Rams’ proposal in July 2013, but the CVC rejected it and St. Louis Public Radio. Kitty Ratcliffe, President of the cited organization “Spend nearly $ 900 million just to play 10 football games wasn’t considered wise for anyone.”

This started another part of the lease. This was done until 2025, but if that “first tier” spec wasn’t met, Rams could change to an annual update after the 2014 season.And the people of St. Louis, Kroenke Nod around the real estate in that Hollywood Park in 2013 before buying a 60-acre lot in January 2014 … Well, isn’t that the situation?

Conclusion: St. Louis had the opportunity to upgrade the dome and maintain the Rams. It wasn’t.When By the time the city came up with the last proposal In December 2015, there is a new $ 1.1 billion stadium on the riverfront, Missouri and Missouri pay half, Rams and NFL pay the other half, and Kroenke heads for owner voting in January 2016. I was already preparing the LA plan.

Conclusion II: Do you remember the old joke that camels are horses designed by the Commission? Perhaps the riverfront stadium managed by the municipality has changed. Kroenke clearly wanted to be able to control the process if he tried to take a risk. There are some risks when considering large Inglewood projects that exceed $ 5 billion.

What did St. Louis gain with Rams lawsuit? – Press Telegram Source link What did St. Louis gain with Rams lawsuit? – Press Telegram

Related Articles

Back to top button