[max]

the state bond money is a political soapbox for those against it. I think they are full of shit. They will cave when someone greases their palms, just like every other corrupt politician.

So while it may look like a huge question mark to us, Nixon and Peacock will be able to sell it the NFL. Translation, they've got a $400M plan. Let's not kid ourselves. We may not like it, but thats what's out there on the table.

[RamsFanSince82]

the state bond money is a political soapbox for those against it. I think they are full of shit. They will cave when someone greases their palms, just like every other corrupt politician.

So while it may look like a huge question mark to us, Nixon and Peacock will be able to sell it the NFL. Translation, they've got a $400M plan. Let's not kid ourselves. We may not like it, but thats what's out there on the table.

I think you're looking at it the wrong way. I'm not convinced the STL politicians will back down and fund the bonds, but I don't think it will ever become an issue because SK will never agree to spend the 700+ M to help build the mistake by the river.

With the bond issue and the PSL issue there's still a lot of uncertainty with the STL financial plan. Grubman said there can't be any uncertainty for a stadium plan from any of the three markets, if they expect to keep their team.

If the other NFL owners reject SK from moving to LA, they would be turning down a $2 B stadium plan, that would probably be the best stadium in the NFL, in the second largest market and they would know that SK is VERY unlikely to accept STL's stadium proposal and will end up moving anyway within the next year or two. Then, all three current markets will end up losing their team.

[max]

the state bond money is a political soapbox for those against it. I think they are full of shit. They will cave when someone greases their palms, just like every other corrupt politician.

So while it may look like a huge question mark to us, Nixon and Peacock will be able to sell it the NFL. Translation, they've got a $400M plan. Let's not kid ourselves. We may not like it, but thats what's out there on the table.

I think you're looking at it the wrong way. I'm not convinced the STL politicians will back down and fund the bonds, but I don't think it will ever become an issue because SK will never agree to spend the 700+ M to help build the mistake by the river.

With the bond issue and the PSL issue there's still a lot of uncertainty with the STL financial plan. Grubman said there can't be any uncertainty for a stadium plan from any of the three markets, if they expect to keep their team.

If the other NFL owners reject SK from moving to LA, they would be turning down a $2 B stadium plan, that would probably be the best stadium in the NFL, in the second largest market and they would know that SK is VERY unlikely to accept STL's stadium proposal and will end up moving anyway within the next year or two. Then, all three current markets will end up losing their team.

Those are good points, especially the last one.

Goodell said as much about Stan not taking the STL deal. And that would leave all 3 markets without a team.

At this point, the most important thing for us to hear is that all 3 plans have come up short. If that happens in the next week, then Stan is in good shape.

[Elvis]

I agree with Max. As much as i'm digging Schaaf, the politicians would ultimately cave on the state bonds if it came to that.

But i also don't think it will come to that. This proposed stadium is almost certainly a non-starter.

Pretty interesting dynamic going on here. We have the league (Goodell, Grubman) saying the St. Louis offer is a failure while some of the owners on the relocation committee are praising it.

How does that play out?

[dieterbrock]

I dont think that the idea that Kroenke wont agree to the St Louis build has any part of the current NFL decision making process.
The proposal is one thing, let them decide whether it passes or not. I just cant see how they could approve one plan, and not all 3. Conversley, I cant see them declining the Oakland and/or San Diego plan and still approving St Louis

[max]

I dont think that the idea that Kroenke wont agree to the St Louis build has any part of the current NFL decision making process.
The proposal is one thing, let them decide whether it passes or not. I just cant see how they could approve one plan, and not all 3. Conversley, I cant see them declining the Oakland and/or San Diego plan and still approving St Louis

That's the big question.

Will they approve one and decline they others?

[dieterbrock]

I dont think that the idea that Kroenke wont agree to the St Louis build has any part of the current NFL decision making process.
The proposal is one thing, let them decide whether it passes or not. I just cant see how they could approve one plan, and not all 3. Conversley, I cant see them declining the Oakland and/or San Diego plan and still approving St Louis

That's the big question.

Will they approve one and decline they others?

I dont see how they can. Of course none of the owners will dispute getting declined. Can they dispute getting approved??
Up is down, right is left...

[Elvis]

[OldSchool]

the state bond money is a political soapbox for those against it. I think they are full of shit. They will cave when someone greases their palms, just like every other corrupt politician.

So while it may look like a huge question mark to us, Nixon and Peacock will be able to sell it the NFL. Translation, they've got a $400M plan. Let's not kid ourselves. We may not like it, but thats what's out there on the table.

I'm not worried or interested if they're full of it or not. My whole point is this is a red flag to the Owners according to Grubmans own comments.

[max]

the state bond money is a political soapbox for those against it. I think they are full of shit. They will cave when someone greases their palms, just like every other corrupt politician.

So while it may look like a huge question mark to us, Nixon and Peacock will be able to sell it the NFL. Translation, they've got a $400M plan. Let's not kid ourselves. We may not like it, but thats what's out there on the table.

I'm not worried or interested if they're full of it or not. My whole point is this is a red flag to the Owners according to Grubmans own comments.

Well, Shaaf is certainly waving the red flag. That's for sure.