NFL Merry-Go-Round: Relocation Roundelay

[colortv]

I keep reading on other boards that "Missouri and St. Louis are moving heaven and earth to get this done", I'm the outside looking in but is that the impression in St. Louis?

[STL FANATIC]

Yeah, I did a little bit more reading. Putting my own speculation on it, St. Louis' best shot may be for Beckham's Miami team to continue to spin their wheels.

Not because they'd get that spot, but because the MLS might expand beyond 24 sooner than they would have originally planned if that's how it best works to get that team in. And my thinking there is that St. Louis could join them in that round. Purely optimistic speculation on my part there, though.

That timing would make more sense for St. Louis. The USL Pro team kicks off this season. Would make sense to let the fan base build through that first.

Anyways, I'm veering a bit much off-topic now.

[STL FANATIC]

I keep reading on other boards that "Missouri and St. Louis are moving heaven and earth to get this done", I'm the outside looking in but is that the impression in St. Louis?

I'm not I sure I understand exactly what that's implying. St. Louis is moving quickly on this, and a number of fairly large steps have happened pretty quickly.

But the funding still isn't committed, so it's not quite to that point yet.

Enough has happened that I believe it will get to that point before long, though. I'm not skeptical of the plan's viability. (Still skeptical on whether it's a good idea, though this recent rendering is an improvement.)

But I don't think they've moved heaven until the funding is committed.

[Gothamite]

I don't think they've moved heaven until the funding is committed.

That's the rub, isn't it?

Even if Beckham fails to secure his stadium deal in Miami, and someow loses the MLS franchise they're contractually obligated to sell him, that expansion slot isn't exactly up for grabs. You're going to have either Minneapolis or Sacramento circling like a shark, and St Louis is well behind both of those in building a soccer stadium.

[colortv]

If St. Louis puts together a viable stadium plan, what options does Kroenke have knowing the 2/3 vote and the whole "exhaust all options etc." deal?

[Gothamite]

He can move anyway. It's an open question at best as to whether they can stop him.

Or, as a less-aggressive move, he can claim that the "viable" plan isn't. Especially if it requires him to put up most of the money. Which they're going to do under the most generous extrapolations I've heard yet.

[STL FANATIC]

Article from the Post-Dispatch detailing some of the changes to the St. Louis stadium design.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/riverfront-stadium-gets-new-frills-keeps-some-historic-buildings/article_ef6a0bb2-b7c0-5c2b-b9fc-f849a888322b.html

Doesn't really commit to what that field is. Peacock offers up the possibility of a "kid zone," but the tone sounds like it's undecided. I find it very weird that they'd just include a football sized piece of green space, and just say "it could be a lot of things." Surely they have something in mind. Maybe they just don't want to share yet.

Or maybe they're just trying to qualm cries of too much parking for now, when in actuality that's what it will be. Who knows.

[STL FANATIC]

I don't think they've moved heaven until the funding is committed.

That's the rub, isn't it?

Even if Beckham fails to secure his stadium deal in Miami, and someow loses the MLS franchise they're contractually obligated to sell him, that expansion slot isn't exactly up for grabs. You're going to have either Minneapolis or Sacramento circling like a shark, and St Louis is well behind both of those in building a soccer stadium.

Right, I think you misunderstood what I was saying.

I'm assuming that if Miami doesn't make the cut this time, then both Minneapolis AND Sacramento get teams.

What I was suggesting is that the MLS would still ultimately want to get Beckham and Miami in, meaning they'd expand beyond 24 teams sooner than they might have thought—whenever Beckham is ready. And if that happens, perhaps St. Louis could be ready to be the 26th team with Beckham's Miami.

Like I said, optimistic speculation.

[STL FANATIC]

If St. Louis puts together a viable stadium plan, what options does Kroenke have knowing the 2/3 vote and the whole "exhaust all options etc." deal?

• To cave and take St. Louis' deal.

• To politic his way into being approved despite that by-law.

• To challenge the league and attempt a move to LA anyways.

• To challenge the league enough to get them to do certain things for him (I have no idea what, one might be permanently waving the cross-ownership ban), and ultimately accept staying in St. Louis.

• To get fed up and sell the team.

I'd think options 2, 3, and 4 would be the favorites. No clue which is THE favorite.

[Gothamite]

I don't think they've moved heaven until the funding is committed.

That's the rub, isn't it?

Even if Beckham fails to secure his stadium deal in Miami, and someow loses the MLS franchise they're contractually obligated to sell him, that expansion slot isn't exactly up for grabs. You're going to have either Minneapolis or Sacramento circling like a shark, and St Louis is well behind both of those in building a soccer stadium.

Right, I think you misunderstood what I was saying.

I'm assuming that if Miami doesn't make the cut this time, then both Minneapolis AND Sacramento get teams.

What I was suggesting is that the MLS would still ultimately want to get Beckham and Miami in, meaning they'd expand beyond 24 teams sooner than they might have thoughtwhenever Beckham is ready. And if that happens, perhaps St. Louis could be ready to be the 26th team with Beckham's Miami.

Like I said, optimistic speculation.

I think that's putting it mildly.

[rams80]

Door #6 is move, followed by arranging for a replacement team.

Article from the Post-Dispatch detailing some of the changes to the St. Louis stadium design.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/riverfront-stadium-gets-new-frills-keeps-some-historic-buildings/article_ef6a0bb2-b7c0-5c2b-b9fc-f849a888322b.html

Doesn't really commit to what that field is. Peacock offers up the possibility of a "kid zone," but the tone sounds like it's undecided. I find it very weird that they'd just include a football sized piece of green space, and just say "it could be a lot of things." Surely they have something in mind. Maybe they just don't want to share yet.

Or maybe they're just trying to qualm cries of too much parking for now, when in actuality that's what it will be. Who knows.

He probably was going to pitch it as a practice field only the Rams shot it down behind closed doors for the reasons I enunciated earlier.

[Gothamite]

Door #6 is move, followed by arranging for a replacement team.

In our list of wildly implausible scenarios, that one seems over-the-edge absurd. Why would do such a thing?

If he wants do keep the market, he'll keep the market. If not, he'll abandon it for someone else to possibly use. But I don't see any reason why he would help that next owner in.

I could see where the league would arrange would arrange for a replacement, to keep the public money flowing. But Kroenke?

[rams80]

Good question.

Honestly I suspect the endgame is Rams move, but Kroenke gives the league an additional cut of the PSL money over what would be given normally.

[Gothamite]

That would fall under the category of negotiating with the league for permission to move. And there's precedent for that.

[rams80]

That would fall under the category of negotiating with the league for permission to move. And there's precedent for that.

Yes, with this very franchise as a matter of fact.

[colortv]

The Chargers have since promised to work cooperatively with the task force, which moved up its deadline to issue a plan from this fall to three months -- which would be in late-May.

The mayor has stressed that a new stadium would not be solely for the Chargers, but would also accommodate San Diego State University, the Holiday and Poinsettia bowls, and other events like soccer matches and concerts.

While Faulconer tasked his advisory group -- which includes experts in development, real estate and finance -- with choosing between a cramped downtown site east of Petco Park and the current Qualcomm Stadium location, problems with each were revealed last week.

Paul Jablonski, the president and CEO of the Metropolitan Transit System, said in a letter to task force Chairman Adam Day that it could take five years or more to vacate the downtown site, where the agency operates a bus maintenance yard. No suitable locations for moving the yard have been found and one site that could have worked has since been occupied by the Monarch School, which educates homeless children, according to the MTS.

Regarding a stadium as part of a major redevelopment of the Mission Valley location, the Chargers have said that construction would take too long for enough revenue to be generated to benefit the team and financing plan. Fabiani said more building at that location could also raise the ire of area residents and raise environmental concerns.

http://www.10news.com/news/chargers-stadium-task-force-holding-first-public-forum

[TheOldRoman]

If the Chargers end up doing a tear down and rebuild at the Qualcomm spot, where would they play in the interim? I just looked it up and the USD stadium only seats 6,000. Would they have to go to LA for 2-3 years? Would the city force renovations to LF at Petco to make that section retractable so they can fit a field in there?

[buckeye]

If the Chargers end up doing a tear down and rebuild at the Qualcomm spot, where would they play in the interim? I just looked it up and the USD stadium only seats 6,000. Would they have to go to LA for 2-3 years? Would the city force renovations to LF at Petco to make that section retractable so they can fit a field in there?

Would they maybe end up playing in the Rose Bowl regardless of whether they move to LA or build on Qualcomm's spot?

[bosrs1]

The Chargers have since promised to work cooperatively with the task force, which moved up its deadline to issue a plan from this fall to three months -- which would be in late-May.

The mayor has stressed that a new stadium would not be solely for the Chargers, but would also accommodate San Diego State University, the Holiday and Poinsettia bowls, and other events like soccer matches and concerts.

While Faulconer tasked his advisory group -- which includes experts in development, real estate and finance -- with choosing between a cramped downtown site east of Petco Park and the current Qualcomm Stadium location, problems with each were revealed last week.

Paul Jablonski, the president and CEO of the Metropolitan Transit System, said in a letter to task force Chairman Adam Day that it could take five years or more to vacate the downtown site, where the agency operates a bus maintenance yard. No suitable locations for moving the yard have been found and one site that could have worked has since been occupied by the Monarch School, which educates homeless children, according to the MTS.

Regarding a stadium as part of a major redevelopment of the Mission Valley location, the Chargers have said that construction would take too long for enough revenue to be generated to benefit the team and financing plan. Fabiani said more building at that location could also raise the ire of area residents and raise environmental concerns.

http://www.10news.com/news/chargers-stadium-task-force-holding-first-public-forum

The "problems" in Mission Valley are nothing but a Chargers created red herring. They openly say they wouldn't mind a stadium in Mission Valley, but fact is they want it downtown despite it being the far more expansive and logistically challenging location that has little public support and a ton of institutional opposition from hotels and the convention center. It's Mission Valley or bust.

If the Chargers end up doing a tear down and rebuild at the Qualcomm spot, where would they play in the interim? I just looked it up and the USD stadium only seats 6,000. Would they have to go to LA for 2-3 years? Would the city force renovations to LF at Petco to make that section retractable so they can fit a field in there?

Would they maybe end up playing in the Rose Bowl regardless of whether they move to LA or build on Qualcomm's spot?

They'd build the new stadium next to Qualcomm, not on it's exact location. Think Meadowlands. Qualcomm is surrounded by one of the largest parking lots on Earth, plenty of room to build.

[colortv]

One day after holding a public forum to solicit advice from Chargers fans, the mayor's stadium task force met on Tuesday with the builders of Petco Park, who have also proposed a downtown football facility.

The meeting with representatives of JMI -- former Padres owner John Moores’ real estate company that oversaw the ballpark district master plan -- comes as the advisory group races to choose a stadium site and financing plan by a self-imposed May deadline.

Last year, JMI outlined four development scenarios, one of them being a joint-use stadium/convention complex that might cost $1.4 billion, about $400 million less than two separate facilities.

The complex would be located on the Tailgate Park parking lot and the MTS bus yard, both located east of Petco Park. JMI also has plans to build a hotel at the foot of Park Boulevard but is awaiting a decision on whether the San Diego Convention Center will be expanded, either at its present location or as part of a stadium complex.

Speaking before the committee were JMI President John Kratzer; Steve Peace, a senior adviser to Moores; and attorney Pat Shea. The JMI representatives presented their multi-use stadium proposal, and task force members asked a "lot of hard questions," said committee chairman Adam Day.

"Like (Chargers special counsel Mark) Fabiani, they were sharing the research they gathered and presenting it without bias," he added.

As the group moves forward on its accelerated timeline, Day said Tuesday he hopes the group can make its site recommendation soon so it can move on to the more challenging question of how to finance a new stadium. Momentum appears to be growing for building a stadium in its current Mission Valley location instead of downtown, but the task force has given no hints of which way it is leaning.

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/mar/03/chargers-stadium-committee-meets-jmi-downtown-site/