Numark Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 It would be helpful that whenever you all interpret the legal document, can you post your legal qualifications so I know who to listen too? Seems like a lot of opinions with people confirming done of them as true and correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like A Mofo Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 total nonsense http://www2.erie.gov...s-stadium-lease Good info, based on the link it clearly shows the 400M exists, so is this link incorrect? Im consudef Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 It would be helpful that whenever you all interpret the legal document, can you post your legal qualifications so I know who to listen too? Seems like a lot of opinions with people confirming done of them as true and correct. For my part, in my office days I used to interpret NYS General Municipal law for construction projects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBuff423 Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Granted we're making a lot of assumptions, but Al Davis's suits and the American Needle rulings cloud the situation a bit with the ironclad nature of the lease. I can envision a scenario, where a new owner is approved by the league and a year later he decides to move the team, against the league's and county's wishes. It's not a foregone conclusion that the league can stop the owner at that point, and the county's remedy would be to seek an injunction, which I'm not sure the courts would grant. Now, that's a lot of assumptions and they're implausible, but they are very much possible. And its entirely possible I'm wrong, so I'll start with that...but my understanding is that in order for ANY NFL franchise to move, regardless of ownership, the NFL HAS to approve it...I believe in large part due to the whole Cleveland debacle decades ago...part of new agreements and given that the NFL has too much to lose by not holding some power regarding its brand...so, I could be mistaken, but even the great Jerrah, couldn't just decide to pick up his Legos and move to LA or wherever if he wanted to, he would need NFL approval prior to moving...could he build a stadium there? Sure, nothing stopping him if the city, county and state permit it...but he wouldn't be hosting any NFL games without NFL's approval and it wouldn't be known as an NFL Franchise until the NFL granted it such.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SF Bills Fan Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 We have seven years to get a new stadium in place. This is what it will come down to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 For my part, in my office days I used to interpret NYS General Municipal law for construction projects. Holiday Inn Express for me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 And its entirely possible I'm wrong, so I'll start with that...but my understanding is that in order for ANY NFL franchise to move, regardless of ownership, the NFL HAS to approve it...I believe in large part due to the whole Cleveland debacle decades ago...part of new agreements and given that the NFL has too much to lose by not holding some power regarding its brand...so, I could be mistaken, but even the great Jerrah, couldn't just decide to pick up his Legos and move to LA or wherever if he wanted to, he would need NFL approval prior to moving...could he build a stadium there? Sure, nothing stopping him if the city, county and state permit it...but he wouldn't be hosting any NFL games without NFL's approval and it wouldn't be known as an NFL Franchise until the NFL granted it such.... As a practical matter, it would be hard for a renegade owner to act against the league's wishes. But legally, I don't think the NFL has standing to prevent an owner from moving if he has the desire and cash to do so. Holiday Inn Express for me I once saw an actor play a lawyer on TV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 (edited) I'm still curious what this random 7th year window for 28 million is? Anyone have a clue why after 7 years there is a time frame that the team can be relocated and the contract can be broken? Poloncarz talks about this at about 16:30 in of this . The 7 year thing goes along with when the next collective bargaining contract comes up. If the team does not move in year 7, it goes back to $400 mil. Again, I have to think this guy is pretty in tune with what the lease says. He holds it up a couple of times in his presentation and it looks like a fat telephone book. Edited March 26, 2014 by reddogblitz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 (edited) As a practical matter, it would be hard for a renegade owner to act against the league's wishes. But legally, I don't think the NFL has standing to prevent an owner from moving if he has the desire and cash to do so. Well, relocation is subject to a 3/4 ratification by the other owners, so there's that...here's the list of regs: http://www.startribu.../148181325.html EDIT: reading those rules, I can see what the OP's linked article is saying...it's awfully hard to comply with the obligation to the team's own fans while breaching the existing lease. Edited March 26, 2014 by thebandit27 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numark Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 For my part, in my office days I used to interpret NYS General Municipal law for construction projects. I like this guy (plus your opinion was positive) so I'm rolling with him as the truth! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Cubed Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Well, relocation is subject to a 3/4 ratification by the other owners, so there's that...here's the list of regs: http://www.startribu.../148181325.html I think, and sorry if I'm wrong GG, he means nothing can stop a owner from just moving the team. Sure they wouldn't be part of the NFL, but the owner does, for lack of a better word, own the team. The NFL couldn't stop them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 One thing I never understood is why the lower buyout in year 7 was even included in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 One thing I never understood is why the lower buyout in year 7 was even included in the first place. I always just assumed that, because stadium viability plays a role in the way the NFL evaluates a team's long-terms stability, they put that in there as a control measure in case the planned renovations don't bring the Ralph up-to-date in a way that meets with other owner's approval. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Well, relocation is subject to a 3/4 ratification by the other owners, so there's that...here's the list of regs: http://www.startribu.../148181325.html EDIT: reading those rules, I can see what the OP's linked article is saying...it's awfully hard to comply with the obligation to the team's own fans while breaching the existing lease. That's not my argument. If an owner wants to abide by the league's rules, then the bylaws are in effect. But if a renegade owner wants to move a team, the league does not have the legal right to stop him. They'll make life very difficult for the owner, but I don't think they can flat out block it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 (edited) That's not my argument. If an owner wants to abide by the league's rules, then the bylaws are in effect. But if a renegade owner wants to move a team, the league does not have the legal right to stop him. They'll make life very difficult for the owner, but I don't think they can flat out block it. Ah okay...yeah, I'm not sure what would happen...betcha the federal court would get involved if it went far enough. EDIT: although, that would have to be one stupid owner to mess with an organization that has an anti-trust exemption Edited March 26, 2014 by thebandit27 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSNBDSC Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 They're not going anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Ah okay...yeah, I'm not sure what would happen...betcha the federal court would get involved if it went far enough. EDIT: although, that would have to be one stupid owner to mess with an organization that has an anti-trust exemption But that's the issue. Al Davis & American Needle whacked away that anti-trust exemption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 But that's the issue. Al Davis & American Needle whacked away that anti-trust exemption. I'd worry more about it if the American Needle case held any sway during the CBA brew-ha-ha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 I'd worry more about it if the American Needle case held any sway during the CBA brew-ha-ha Yup, but as said, these are implausible hypotheticals. In reality, by the time the trust is ready to sell the team and the new ownership group is approved, we're into the 2016 season. Plus, there are no open markets with an NFL ready stadium and nothing in the planning stages. So even if the new owner wanted to move the team, it would be hard to do so before 2019. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRT88 Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 It's going to be a long time for Wilson's estate to make it through the courts. Until that happens the franchise cannot be sold. We have 18 months minimum before the process begins with the sale of the team. In the mean time it will be run by a trust and overseen by the NFL. Let's hope Oakland or St. Louis jump to LA before that and hopefully the $400m buyout will be active. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts