Archive for the ‘St. Louis news’ Category

h1

Hallelujah

January 12, 2016

The Wall Street Journal reports:

NFL Owners Approve Rams’ Return to Los Angeles

The National Football League is headed back to Los Angeles in a big way.

After two decades without a team in the nation’s second largest media market, NFL owners voted Tuesday to move the St. Louis Rams back to the city they called home for nearly 50 years. NFL owners also gave the San Diego Chargers the right to join the Rams if the two franchises can work out a deal to share the planned stadium.

The vote came after years of negotiations, land deals, stalled talks and bare-knuckled lobbying within the exclusive club that is the NFL owners group. Ultimately, the owners voted to approve a move by one of its wealthiest owners, Stan Kroenke, who controls one of the most valuable large parcels of undeveloped land in the Los Angeles region—site of the former Hollywood Park Racetrack in Inglewood where the franchise plans to build a $2 billion stadium, and Alex Spanos, scion of the Chargers, who has owned his team for more than 30 years. […]

What great news. Now Mr. Kroenke (and the NFL owners cartel) won’t be trying to milk the city of St. Louis and the State of Missouri to build him a stadium.

A recent report about Kroenke’s unflattering comments about St. Louis as a venue for pro football excited some public resentment here. What amused me most was his remark that game attendance “has been well below the League’s average”. Maybe you should have given some thought to prices, chief, particularly given the StL Rams dismal record.

Good bye and good riddance, Mr. Kroenke. Take your Rams and go home.

What St. Louis needs is a business like one that-comes-after-TWA or that-comes-after-Google or that-comes-after-Caterpillar. Something productive, in short.

What it doesn’t need is the liability of subsidizing a wealthy person’s entertainment company.


Update

There’s more good news (says the person who couldn’t care less about pro sports).

Jaguars owner not interested in move to St. Louis

The Rams are gone. Mark Davis continues to insist he’s not interested in moving his Oakland Raiders to St. Louis.

So what about Jacksonville?

A small market that struggles to fill seats. Currently plays a game a year in London to help generate revenue. And owned by Shahid Khan. You know, the central Illinois businessman who unsuccessfully bid to purchase the Rams in 2010.

With the St. Louis market currently vacant as a result of Tuesday’s relocation vote by NFL owners, would Khan be interested in bringing his Jaguars to the Gateway City?

“I don’t see that at all, OK?” Khan said firmly.

He spoke just before midnight Tuesday in the lobby of the Houston hotel, where just a few hours earlier NFL owners decided to spurn St. Louis and let the Rams move to Los Angeles.

Advertisements
h1

Ouch!

December 10, 2015

Yep… I think we should rename it the Screw-Me State.

Nick Gillespie at Reason writes about a report in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

Show-Me State Suckers Shell Out Super-Subsidies For NFL Rams

Let’s say you want to build a new house for yourself. Otherwise, you tell your neighbors and your city council, you’ll leave town, taking your money, tax payments, jobs, and prestige elsewhere.

What are the odds that legislators will cover at least 40 percent of your new house’s costs?

And maybe throw another 15 percent your way too on naming rights to your deluxe manor and also let you collect all revenue from nights when you rent out the house to strangers for parties or other accomodations?

The odds are pretty low in most cities in America.

But if you own the NFL’s Rams (who started out in Cleveland before heading to Los Angeles and then to St. Louis), you’re in luck. Despite generally sucking—the Rams won two NFL titles back in the old days and just one Super Bowl, in 1999—St. Louis and the entire state of Missouri is so desperate to keep the team that they are ponying up at least 40 percent of the $1 billion-plus cost of a new stadium. […]

h1

The Post-Dispatch ain’t what it used to be

June 22, 2014

I can recall when I stopped reading George Will’s columns in the late 70s because he argued against the Carter administration’s plan to de-regulate U.S. airlines. I thought that was fairly clueless attitude but, that said, I think Mr. Will has written many good columns since then.

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, on the other hand, hasn’t done so well over the years. It’s always been a fairly liberal paper: someone once wrote a letter to the P-D editor in the 80s claiming that the paper wouldn’t endorse Jesus Christ for office if he ran as a Republican. I found that letter pretty amusing.

But the Post-Dispatch’s announcement on Thursday (6/19) that it was dropping Mr. Will’s column was done for the wrong reasons, I think, and marks a new low for the paper. (My emphasis below.)

Editor’s note: Michael Gerson replaces George Will

Dear Post-Dispatch readers,
Starting today, Washington Post columnist Michael Gerson replaces George Will on Thursdays and Sundays.

Mr. Gerson, who grew up in St. Louis and still has family here, is a former speechwriter and top aide to President George W. Bush. […]

The change has been under consideration for several months, but a column published June 5, in which Mr. Will suggested that sexual assault victims on college campuses enjoy a privileged status, made the decision easier. The column was offensive and inaccurate; we apologize for publishing it.

Here’s Mr. Will’s column in The Washington Post: Colleges become the victims of progressivism. Read it for yourself and decide whether it’s offensive. It probably offends a few government bureaucrats and some university administrators (another type of bureaucrat) but I’d say that was about all the people who should be offended.

Not that there’s anything wrong with offending people occasionally, mind you. As Samuel Johnson said, "Every man has a right to utter what he thinks truth, and every other man has a right to knock him down for it."

There’s been some buzz about the P-D’s decision. David Bernstein has a piece about it (also in the Post): (Mis)reading George Will.

And here’s Mr. Will being interviewed by CSPAN about these events. Let him speak for himself. Then you can go knock him down, if you like.

%d bloggers like this: