Warning for those trying to relocate...St Louis settlement could be in the billions of dollars

[That's No Moon]

6 minutes ago, Big Turk said:

 

Haha...oh they are gleefully holding those emails as a sledgehammer against anyone who would dare bad mouth them(see Gruden, Jon).

 

Suffice to say emails will get "leaked anonymously" as needed to that end game.

That's a dangerous game to play because if there are things in there which could be evidence in a lawsuit they'd have to give them up in discovery. That people even know they exist at this point makes it likely someone will try to find a way to sue to see them, or at least portions of them. They'd be wise to destroy every single one now that they are done with them and before anything comes down the path that would prevent them from destroying them later on.

[Don Otreply]

4 hours ago, Big Turk said:

 

You can never have abundance coming from a place of lack and extolling those virtues. Ngmi

Not so, greed is not a virtue, and is not a thing to aspire to. 

[Big Turk]

Just now, Don Otreply said:

Not so, greed is not a virtue, and is not a thing to aspire to. 

 

Only poor people try to make rich people out to be evil. Must make them feel better about their status they choose to maintain in life.

[Matt_In_NH]

20 hours ago, Warcodered said:

I mean you can't just add one random team. It wouldn't fit equally with the divions.

Prime number of games one the schedule, there could be a prime number of teams and end up with a funky schedule....why do that when you can add two teams and even more revenues

 

[Don Otreply]

31 minutes ago, Big Turk said:

 

Only poor people try to make rich people out to be evil. Must make them feel better about their status they choose to maintain in life.

Not so, rich people and corporations do not pay a fair rate taxes wise for the use of our nations infrastructure. If I pay forty percent so should they, their wages from dividends is taxed at a lesser rate than wage earners, so in actual effect one is punished for having a job when the two are compared. I don’t care if someone is rich, more power to them,  I do care when they don’t carry their own weight as a citizen of this country. If my wages are taxed at a given rate, theirs should be taxed on the same scale as the rest of us, no exceptions, and you know, they will still be rich, I dislike freeloaders who want others to pay their way. 

[Big Turk]

5 minutes ago, Don Otreply said:

Not so, rich people and corporations do not pay a fair rate taxes wise for the use of our nations infrastructure. If I pay forty percent so should they, their wages from dividends is taxed at a lesser rate than wage earners, so in actual effect one is punished for having a job when the two are compared. I don’t care if someone is rich, more power to them,  I do care when they don’t carry their own weight as a citizen of this country. If my wages are taxed at a given rate, theirs should be taxed on the same scale as the rest of us, no exceptions, and you know, they will still be rich, I dislike freeloaders who want others to pay their way. 

 

Because they are smart and use the tax laws to their advantages. But their smaller percentage is many times more than you pay in dollars.

Edited October 28, 2021 by Big Turk

[Brianmoorman4jesus]

The more teams the merrier IMO. Throw one in London. Let’s get a 9:30 am game every week. I love that.

[Einstein]

4 hours ago, Patience said:

 I've defended clients in both arenas.  The question comes down to: what exactly is bad faith?  You need the discovery process (exchange of written documents, depositions) to bear that out.  

 

Well said. And the NFL (historically) does not like getting to the discovery stage.

[Patience]

20 minutes ago, Einstein said:

 

Well said. And the NFL (historically) does not like getting to the discovery stage.

 

It's a bit tighter when it comes to the scope of discovery in federal court as opposed to state court (state court generally can be a free for all).  Statutory limits on interrogatories, no fishing expeditions for documents, etc.  If I'm defending, I always try to find any justification to make a removal to federal court if it's filed in state.  Just less shenanigans and stricter judges/judges' clerks.  

[Don Otreply]

18 minutes ago, Big Turk said:

 

Because they are smart and use the tax laws to their advantages. But their smaller percentage is many times more than you pay in dollars.

If I pay in percentage so should they, their dividend wages are taxed at a lesser rate than a wage earners wages are, they should not be able to not pay taxes and still use the infrastructure that they don’t pay for, it’s called being a freeloader, Pfizer pays no taxes and the you and me of this country have to cover for them, it’s a scam, you know it, I know it, that’s why there is a movement at hand to enforce a minimum tax on these freeloaders, you may like ballwashing the rich but I’m not picking up

what you’re putting down. 
 

 

by the way Before this gets me pointed by the mods, I’m out, enjoy the Miami game, looking forward to our guys kicking their azsez!! 
 

Go Bills!!!

[dollars 2 donuts]

21 hours ago, Motorin' said:

 

Say hello to the London Bridges or some such shite to balance it out. 

 

Talk about symmetry. 17 games per year with 17 teams in each Conference. 

 

The Frankfurt Universe!

 

or maybe the Frankfurt Kuiper Belt?

 

I don’t know, Universe or Kuiper Belt, something along those lines.

 

 

[HardyBoy]

1 hour ago, Big Turk said:

 

Because they are smart and use the tax laws to their advantages. But their smaller percentage is many times more than you pay in dollars.

 

Here's the thing, it's just like the players union and the owners negotiating about where to slice the pie. The owners known its all about the pie size, everything else is secondary, and the owners control the media so they leak stories to get public perception a certain way to exert pressure on players. Really makes you wonder what is in those emails they are so worried about coming out (guessing concussion stuff is a big concern).

 

But anyway, your saying how smart they are to use legal bribery to manipulate the tax system to make it so they can do a sneaky end around to change the slice of the pie when people did not agree to that...it's not smart, it's unethical, undemocratic and unfair.

 

It's all about the size of the slice of the pie, just like in sports leagues.

[the_D]

13 hours ago, TheFunPolice said:

2 conferences of 17 teams, top 7 in each conference makes the playoffs, no divisions. 

 

You play 17 games: every team in your conference once (16 games), plus 1 crossover game= 17 games. 

 

Benefits:

 

1. No 7-9 or 8-8 team gets to the playoffs for "winning" a cupcake division over a team with a better record

2. Almost a totally balanced schedule: everyone in the conference plays the exact same schedule, aside from the crossover game. 

3. When the playoffs begin, you'll have the true top 7 teams in each conference. 

4. Interconference games would be unique, given that each team would have only 1. However, there could be 1 scheduled each week so there's always an AFC/NFC game on. 

 

It's not too different from now, where you only play 5 interconference games anyway. It was 4 a year ago. It could be 1. 

 

The numbers work perfectly for this. 

 

 

 

I can see how this would be a good model. However, I think tradition would kill it before it ever got traction. 

[heavydutyrudy]

On 10/27/2021 at 9:36 PM, DallasBillsFan1 said:

The NFL needs to reduce the number of teams, not expand.  Too many bottom dwellers and a league with diluted talent.  Have you seen ticket prices for most of the games?  $20-$60 per ticket ... with only eight games a year?  Any talk of expansion is crazy.

There hasn't been a $20 ticket to an NFL game since 1970.  $20 might get you a bag of pop corn. 

[DallasBillsFan1]

8 hours ago, heavydutyrudy said:

There hasn't been a $20 ticket to an NFL game since 1970.  $20 might get you a bag of pop corn. 

You're not paying attention ... yes there are.

[Frostbite]

On 10/27/2021 at 9:36 PM, DallasBillsFan1 said:

The NFL needs to reduce the number of teams, not expand.  Too many bottom dwellers and a league with diluted talent.  Have you seen ticket prices for most of the games?  $20-$60 per ticket ... with only eight games a year?  Any talk of expansion is crazy.

And who gets the boot? Probably the smaller market teams, right? I don't like our chances. 

[Orlando Tim]

On 10/27/2021 at 10:17 PM, Big Turk said:

NFL is basically screwed right now...St. Louis attorneys have evidence Jones and Kroenke colluded to convince other owners to let them move as far back as 2013 so he could build the new mega stadium in LA meaning all of the future negotiations the Rams had with the city were in bad faith and intentionally wasted tax payer dollars for upgrades, etc in  attempts to get them to stay.

If the city really has evidence of this you are 100% correct. How these guys can be dumb enough to put themselves in these situations is astounding to me.

[Big Turk]

28 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

If the city really has evidence of this you are 100% correct. How these guys can be dumb enough to put themselves in these situations is astounding to me.

 

They do and Kroenke and the NFL know they do which is why they are desperately trying to settle prior to going to trial and having a bunch of other unflattering stuff come out. Full damage control mode.

[Mr. WEO]

Chargers and Raiders relocated without any such worries.  Doubt this will deter future owners.  They will just have to be smarter about their public statements.

 

Also, if they simply award a franchise to STL, how doe that work?  Who will build them a stadium?  It won't be the city of STL.

[TBBills]

Who on this site is needed to be warned about moving there stadium? Which one of you have a stadium you aren't telling us about?

Edited October 29, 2021 by TBBills

[aristocrat]

1 minute ago, Mr. WEO said:

Chargers and Raiders relocated without any such worries.  Doubt this will deter future owners.  They will just have to be smarter about their public statements.

 

Also, if they simply award a franchise to STL, how doe that work?  Who will build them a stadium?  It won't be the city of STL.

 

The NFL can sell a franchise to a new owner.  The NFL can also pay them a settlement that could cover a stadium. 

[LabattBlue]

I don't see an expansion to Europe any time soon...not even in the next couple of decades.  Teams in Canada(Toronto, Montreal or Vancouver)? Sure.  But I think the players for the most part, would hate playing for a team in Europe.  Adjusting to life in a foreign country, crazy travel schedule, etc...  A team in Mexico City...even less likely.

[Big Turk]

59 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

Chargers and Raiders relocated without any such worries.  Doubt this will deter future owners.  They will just have to be smarter about their public statements.

 

Also, if they simply award a franchise to STL, how doe that work?  Who will build them a stadium?  It won't be the city of STL.

 

It wasn't their public statements that are going to do them in.

[DCofNC]

I think it would be far more likely that a team moves there.  This makes me wonder though, did Cleveland pull the same stunt to get a new Browns team back there and we just never heard about it?

 

I could see the Chargers or Rams getting a buy out of sorts to get out of their part of the SoFi stadium deal and go there. 

[BuffaloBillyG]

On 10/27/2021 at 9:07 PM, Warcodered said:

I mean you can't just add one random team. It wouldn't fit equally with the divions.

Well, if St. Louis gets an expansion out of it there is always Oakland and San Diego that could pipe in and sue for a team. We all know the NFL would love to have a team in London, perhaps even Mexico. 

[stuvian]

i will enjoy watching these masters of the universe squirm

[Mr. WEO]

10 hours ago, aristocrat said:

 

The NFL can sell a franchise to a new owner.  The NFL can also pay them a settlement that could cover a stadium. 

the supposition is they would offer a franchise in lieu of a cash settlement 

10 hours ago, Big Turk said:

 

It wasn't their public statements that are going to do them in.

Sure it is-its what began most of this

[Big Turk]

3 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

the supposition is they would offer a franchise in lieu of a cash settlement 

Sure it is-its what began most of this

 

No, it's the private backwaters dealings that proved their public statements were BS that is going to do them in.

[Patrick Duffy]

10 hours ago, Big Turk said:

 

It wasn't their public statements that are going to do them in.

 

16 minutes ago, Big Turk said:

 

No, it's the private backwaters dealings that proved their public statements were BS that is going to do them in.

Not that it's very important, but I'm a little confused here. You said it wasn't their public statements that will do them in. Then 2nd post here in bold seems if that's the case then it sounds like it is the public statements.

 

You say the dealings or whatever proved the public statements were BS. If so, then it seems the BS statements is the reason. If BS statements weren't made in the 1st place then it's different right?

[Big Turk]

1 hour ago, Sheneneh Jenkins said:

 

Not that it's very important, but I'm a little confused here. You said it wasn't their public statements that will do them in. Then 2nd post here in bold seems if that's the case then it sounds like it is the public statements.

 

You say the dealings or whatever proved the public statements were BS. If so, then it seems the BS statements is the reason. If BS statements weren't made in the 1st place then it's different right?

 

The public statements they made would have been fine if evidence didn't come out they were lying and just playing them for fools all along while intending to move.

[Patrick Duffy]

8 minutes ago, Big Turk said:

 

The public statements they made would have been fine if evidence didn't come out they were lying and just playing them for fools all along while intending to move.

Yes, in which case those public statements is what did it then. You stated it was not the public statements that did them in. Those statements which turned out to be lies was the start of it. That means ultimately that is what did it right?

 

Not sure if you meant something different when you said the untruthful statements isn't what "did them in"

 

 

Edited October 30, 2021 by Sheneneh Jenkins

[Big Turk]

9 hours ago, Sheneneh Jenkins said:

Yes, in which case those public statements is what did it then. You stated it was not the public statements that did them in. Those statements which turned out to be lies was the start of it. That means ultimately that is what did it right?

 

Not sure if you meant something different when you said the untruthful statements isn't what "did them in"

 

 

 

No, the public statements are the same things that are said all the time in all those type of situations..."oh we are trying to work things out", blah blah blah. 

 

If that was the case and they were being honest nobody would have done anything. It's because they weren't and it was found out in their backroom dealings/emails/texts, etc that they actively were working against what they said publicly and still used taxpayer dollars to do it that is going to seal their fate.

[Patrick Duffy]

2 hours ago, Big Turk said:

 

No, the public statements are the same things that are said all the time in all those type of situations..."oh we are trying to work things out", blah blah blah. 

 

If that was the case and they were being honest nobody would have done anything. It's because they weren't and it was found out in their backroom dealings/emails/texts, etc that they actively were working against what they said publicly and still used taxpayer dollars to do it that is going to seal their fate.

Lol, ok that's my point. Because the public statements were lies then that means the public statements is what did it. So if they wouldn't have lied in the 1st place nothing would have come of it. 

 

So the start of it was the public statement. Whether truth or lies, it was a statement made. 

 

So if you say it's not the public statements being the reason for the fall out, then what would you say is the reason?

Edited October 30, 2021 by Sheneneh Jenkins

[Mr. WEO]

12 hours ago, Big Turk said:

 

No, it's the private backwaters dealings that proved their public statements were BS that is going to do them in.

 

You've made my point.

 

 

[Big Turk]

5 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

You've made my point.

 

 

 

Ehh, I mean it's half a dozen of one and 6 of the other.

6 hours ago, Sheneneh Jenkins said:

Lol, ok that's my point. Because the public statements were lies then that means the public statements is what did it. So if they wouldn't have lied in the 1st place nothing would have come of it. 

 

So the start of it was the public statement. Whether truth or lies, it was a statement made. 

 

So if you say it's not the public statements being the reason for the fall out, then what would you say is the reason?

 

Theoretically yes, but it was their actions to the contrary that caused the problems, not their statements.

 

But I get wh at you are saying.

[uticaclub]

On 10/29/2021 at 10:34 AM, No Place To Hyde said:

Well, if St. Louis gets an expansion out of it there is always Oakland and San Diego that could pipe in and sue for a team. We all know the NFL would love to have a team in London, perhaps even Mexico. 

The NFL offered a lot for the Chargers to stay in San Diego, the city didn't want a new stadium and didn't really care about the team