2 LA Groups Show Interest in Vikings

[Gothamite]

Kroenke married into Wal Mart money. He does not care what Missourians, or indeed, the general hoi polloi think of him.

Agreed.

Rich people don't get and stay rich by paying for things themselves. They certainly don't stay rich by spending hundreds of millions of their own money, not when somebody else is contractually obligated to pick up the tab.

Would Kroenke personally prefer to keep the Rams in St. Louis, all things considered? I don't doubt it. But will he let the city out from under a favorable lease out of sentiment? That I highly doubt.

The Rams have a stadium lease coming up in a couple years, a city on the hook for replacing it which has just lost $150 million annually from its budget, and a viable relocation option. No amount of wishing can change that at the very least, the Rams simply have to be part of any relocation conversation.

[DustDevil61]

As of today, here's some goings on with a potential new Vikings stadium, in Minnesota:

Three Counties Consider New Vikings Stadium

So, with the Rams, have they made any headway in getting the Edward Jones Dome in any better shape? I've heard that they plan to do something to improve its facilities by 2012 (top 25% of the league's stadiums, or something to that effect). What many think is that the EdDome can never get to this point. Am I right on this? What about making a major overhaul to the Ed? Or would a new stadium likely be a more reasonable/better option?

[The_Admiral]

Anything's better than the EdDome, a convention center that occasionally thinks it's a football stadium. I don't know how drastically you could renovate, since it appears pretty hemmed in and there's not a whole lot you can do to fix up a closed stadium anyway. Financing might be dicey, too: I think Missouri just passed a law against stadium socialism, and even if they didn't, that the Cardinals built a very good stadium with private financing really belies the necessity of public financing, doesn't it? And they certainly can't threaten to go to the Metro-East, either. Talk about being told to piss up a rope.

[Gothamite]

Financing might be dicey, too: I think Missouri just passed a law against stadium socialism

Actually, my understanding of Prop A isn't that it was specifically against stadium financing, but that it stripped St Louis of $150M in annual tax revenues.

So how is St Louis going to build the Rams a new park when they suddenly lost the equivalent of their entire police department budget? They'll be lucky to cover their existing obligations, much less take on any new ones.

[dfwabel]

Financing might be dicey, too: I think Missouri just passed a law against stadium socialism

Actually, my understanding of Prop A isn't that it was specifically against stadium financing, but that it stripped St Louis of $150M in annual tax revenues.

So how is St Louis going to build the Rams a new park when they suddenly lost the equivalent of their entire police department budget? They'll be lucky to cover their existing obligations, much less take on any new ones.

The passed amendment further requires voters in cities that currently have an earnings tax, St. Louis and Kansas City, to approve continuation of such tax at the next general municipal election and at an election held every five years or to phase out the tax over a period of ten years.

[Gothamite]

Right. Which us where the $150M was coming from every year.

St Louis and Kansas City will have to start cutting services or figuring out another way to raise that money just to pay the cities' bills (presuming they haven't been running massive surpluses), much less build new stadiums.

I appreciate the voters of Missouri wanting to reign in taxes. Who likes 'em? But in this case, Prop A will most likely cost the state an NFL franchise.

[Viper]

As I understand it, location is the main reason why a permanently shared stadium was a non-starter. The Gophers specifically wanted their stadium on campus, while the Vikings wanted to remain in downtown Minneapolis (except for Zygi's short-lived proposal to put the stadium in a north metro suburb).

That has never made much sense to me. The new Gophers football stadium is two miles from the Metrodome. Walking distance. Through sub-zero temps/wind chills and snow/ice-covered streets and sidewalks in December and January, and not a skyway in sight. It's not like the Gophers were moving to St. Cloud.

And now that the University has a stadium, and the Vikings do not, what's the difficulty? The Mississippi is hardly the Rubicon.

There's your answer. If Viking fans really don't want to sit through those kind of conditions during a game (hence the rationale for having a roof on the Dome and on its proposed replacements in the first place), they sure aren't going to want to have to trudge two miles through the same conditions just to get to the game.

I don't really see what the bfd is with the Metrodome. For baseball games it was a toilet, but I find it perfectly acceptable for football.

You might find it acceptable, but Wilf and the other league owners don't. It's all about revenue sharing. For obvious reasons that means the league is going to lean pretty heavily on the revenue parasites lowest-revenue teams to either {a} improve the money-making potential of their stadiums, {b} build whole new stadiums with more money-making potential, or {c} find new markets to play in with more money-making potential. And in terms of revenue, the Vikings rank right around rock-bottom in the league in stadium revenue.

[Gothamite]

As I understand it, location is the main reason why a permanently shared stadium was a non-starter. The Gophers specifically wanted their stadium on campus, while the Vikings wanted to remain in downtown Minneapolis (except for Zygi's short-lived proposal to put the stadium in a north metro suburb).

That has never made much sense to me. The new Gophers football stadium is two miles from the Metrodome. Walking distance. Through sub-zero temps/wind chills and snow/ice-covered streets and sidewalks in December and January, and not a skyway in sight. It's not like the Gophers were moving to St. Cloud.

And now that the University has a stadium, and the Vikings do not, what's the difficulty? The Mississippi is hardly the Rubicon.

There's your answer. If Viking fans really don't want to sit through those kind of conditions during a game (hence the rationale for having a roof on the Dome and on its proposed replacements in the first place), they sure aren't going to want to have to trudge two miles through the same conditions just to get to the game.

Yes, but I wasn't seriously suggesting that they would walk (they're not New Yorkers). They'll drive, like they do now. And I they're coming from the West Side of Minneapolis, going to the U campus stadium would take an additional 5 minutes.

I still don't see what the objection was.

[Viper]

As I understand it, location is the main reason why a permanently shared stadium was a non-starter. The Gophers specifically wanted their stadium on campus, while the Vikings wanted to remain in downtown Minneapolis (except for Zygi's short-lived proposal to put the stadium in a north metro suburb).

That has never made much sense to me. The new Gophers football stadium is two miles from the Metrodome. Walking distance. Through sub-zero temps/wind chills and snow/ice-covered streets and sidewalks in December and January, and not a skyway in sight. It's not like the Gophers were moving to St. Cloud.

And now that the University has a stadium, and the Vikings do not, what's the difficulty? The Mississippi is hardly the Rubicon.

There's your answer. If Viking fans really don't want to sit through those kind of conditions during a game (hence the rationale for having a roof on the Dome and on its proposed replacements in the first place), they sure aren't going to want to have to trudge two miles through the same conditions just to get to the game.

Yes, but I wasn't seriously suggesting that they would walk. They'll drive, like they do now. And I they're coming from the West Side of Minneapolis, going to the U campus stadium would take an additional 5 minutes.

Driving through such conditions isn't exactly a picnic either. And once they arrive on campus, where would they park? The U of M runs shuttle buses to and from the stadium for each of its games because of the lack of available general-public parking on campus. Would they or the Vikings be willing to do this for Viking games, and would fans go for it? Also, it's not just alcohol in the stadium that's prohibited; the U also frowns upon tailgating in those lots that are available near the stadium. In the end, most fans would have park and tailgate long distances from the stadium and then, well, walk to the game through snow and ice.

I still don't see what the objection was.

Logistics is the main issue. Those two extra miles wouldn't be so bad if (1) you didn't have to go through downtown to get to TCF Bank Stadium (which most Viking season ticket holders, coming from the south and west suburbs, do), (2) there were more than three routes (two of which are Interstates) available across the river between downtown and the East Bank campus, (3) the light rail system ran to the campus, (4) the campus and surrounding area had an order of magnitude more parking spaces available to the non-university public than it does, and (5) the bulk of hotel space is also downtown so visiting teams and out-of-town fans also have to commute those two extra miles. As it is, the Vikings moving to TCF Bank Stadium would be a commuting nightmare not only for their fans, but for anyone else having to drive through Minneapolis on game days. At least with separate stadiums, Viking-related traffic tie-ups are confined to downtown and Gopher-related tie-ups confined to the U of M campus.

Another issue, though not really related to location, was that the Vikings and Gophers have different sets of sponsors and advertisers. I don't know what bank (if any) sponsors the Vikings, but obviously that would be a big issue if it's anyone other than TCF.

[Mac the Knife]

Yeah, now that the Gophers have their own facility, the Vikings sharing it on anything beyond a temporary basis would be unfeasible.

I'm on board with those who think that if something isn't done by June 2011, the Vikings will be the first to head to Los Angeles, playing at the Rose Bowl or the L.A. Coliseum for a few years while a new stadium is built. I see the Chargers joining them unless they get a new stadium deal in place by 2012, or the Buffalo Bills once Ralph Wilson dies - there's no way the Bills will be kept there, despite what Jim Kelly has said.

[AceHawk447]

Maybe you cam (sic) move the Jaguars went to the NFC West, the Rams moved to the NFC South and the Panthers moved to the AFC South.

Why not this for a deal, with no "reel-line-mint" involved, none at all: L.A. gets the Rams back, while St. Louis gets the Jaguars. [447]

[The_Admiral]

Because as logical and pragmatic as it would be to have a league with Los Angeles and St. Louis instead of St. Louis and Jacksonville, it's hard to take a team away from someone and immediately say "no you like THIS team now." And to tell the truth, St. Louis and Jacksonville are about equally mediocre as NFL towns, so it's not really like flipping one city's team to the other is going to accomplish anything positive. If the Rams went back to Los Angeles, you still might be better off just scrapping it out in Jacksonville than you would trying to start all over again with them in St. Louis.

[Mac the Knife]

Jaguars and Vikings to L.A. in 2012,

Bills to Toronto within two years of Ralph Wilson's death,

Rams screwed and stuck in St. Louis.

Chargers screwed and stuck in San Diego.

-or-

Chargers and Vikings to L.A. in 2013,

Bills to Toronto within two years of Ralph Wilson's death,

Jaguars or Rams to Minneapolis when they get a new stadium deal,

Jaguars to St. Louis if it's the Rams that go to Minneapolis, or

Rams screwed and stuck in St. Louis if Jaguars go to Minneapolis.

Thoughts on these theories?

[NJTank]

If any of these scenarios happen, Vikings must leave name and colors in Minnesota like the Browns did.

[McCall]

Jaguars and Vikings to L.A. in 2012,

Bills to Toronto within two years of Ralph Wilson's death,

Rams screwed and stuck in St. Louis.

Chargers screwed and stuck in San Diego.

-or-

Chargers and Vikings to L.A. in 2013,

Bills to Toronto within two years of Ralph Wilson's death,

Jaguars or Rams to Minneapolis when they get a new stadium deal,

Jaguars to St. Louis if it's the Rams that go to Minneapolis, or

Rams screwed and stuck in St. Louis if Jaguars go to Minneapolis.

Thoughts on these theories?

Yes, because anybody having to stay in Missouri is screwed, huh?

[Gothamite]

Yes, because anybody having to stay in Missouri is screwed, huh?

Better start the bake sales, raising money for that new stadium then.

The Bills are not moving to Toronto. Toronto doesn't seem to want them very much.

[Mac the Knife]

Yes, because anybody having to stay in Missouri is screwed, huh?

Better start the bake sales, raising money for that new stadium then.

The Bills are not moving to Toronto. Toronto doesn't seem to want them very much.

If their new owner can see more $$$ in Toronto than is currently the case in Buffalo, they're gone. I personally don't want to see that, myself, as I think an NFL franchise in Toronto ultimately kills the CFL.

[Luigi74]

Yes, because anybody having to stay in Missouri is screwed, huh?

Better start the bake sales, raising money for that new stadium then.

The Bills are not moving to Toronto. Toronto doesn't seem to want them very much.

If their new owner can see more $$$ in Toronto than is currently the case in Buffalo, they're gone. I personally don't want to see that, myself, as I think an NFL franchise in Toronto ultimately kills the CFL.

No one is going to Toronto until there is a new stadium.

[Gothamite]

And without fan interest, there won't be one.

I agree that the Bills experimented with Toronto to test the relocation waters, but it proved those waters far too chilly.

[Brian in Boston]

Jaguars and Vikings to L.A. in 2012,

Bills to Toronto within two years of Ralph Wilson's death,

Rams screwed and stuck in St. Louis.

Chargers screwed and stuck in San Diego.

-or-

Chargers and Vikings to L.A. in 2013,

Bills to Toronto within two years of Ralph Wilson's death,

Jaguars or Rams to Minneapolis when they get a new stadium deal,

Jaguars to St. Louis if it's the Rams that go to Minneapolis, or

Rams screwed and stuck in St. Louis if Jaguars go to Minneapolis.

Thoughts on these theories?

My own 2¢?

Barring an on-field run over the remainder of the season and throughout the playoffs that sees the Chargers winning the Super Bowl and thereby convincing a majority of San Diego voters to approve a large expenditure of public monies towards construction of a state-of-the-art satdium adjacent to Petco Park, the Bolts are headed to Los Angeles. Hell, with AEG pushing the downtown LA stadium plan, not even a Super Bowl run might save the Chargers. Bottom line? AEG gets done. The politicos in the City of Los Angeles are so far up AEG's ass over what the construction of Staples Center and LA Live! have meant to downtown Los Angeles that said officials are more than willing to sign-off on an AEG-led project that promises to not only bring the NFL back to the city, but jump-start the moribund LA Convention Center, as well. Add to that the facts that Alex Spanos is unloading a minority stake in the Chargers for estate-planning purposes, the Chargers have always considered LA a secondary market and the Spanos family has a business relationship with marketing wunderkind - and Time Leiweke confidante - Casey Wasserman and the writing is on the wall. The Chargers are a mortal lock to be setting-up shop in the City of Angels.

As for a second team in LA, I'd put my money on the Jaguars. The NFL realizes that Jacksonville is not a viable long-term market for the league. It simply did not pan-out as the league had planned. They underestimated the hold that either the Dolphins, Falcons or Buccaneers already had on local fans of the NFL. They underestimated the hold that major college football programs had on locals. They underestimated the impact that having a significant portion of the area's population being comprised of a transient military population would have.

As for the Rams, Vikings and Bills? I wouldn't be shocked to see the Rams relocate. Their lease agreement provides a pretty clear-cut "out" and there's no questioning that Missouri law is going to make it exceedingly difficult for local authorities to find a way to invest significant public dollars towards providing the team with a new home. Unless Mr. Kroenke suddenly feels "generous", the local politicos in St. Louis are going to have to get awfully creative. Minnesota? I ultimately see something being worked out to keep the Vikings in the Twin Cities. The Bills? The minute Ralph Wilson shuffles off this mortal coil, the Bills are done in Buffalo. Toronto's chances of snagging the team will depend entirely upon a deep-pocketed, local owner being willing to invest the time, effort and cash necessary to get a stadium-financing deal done. If that happens, and an NFL franchise were to set-up full-time shop in Toronto, as opposed to a Buffalo-based team playing a game or two a season there, I have no doubt in my mind that a supportive fan-base would materialize for the team.