STLtoday.com

Ike Hammett wrote: ↑23 Dec 2025 19:23 pm

CCard wrote: ↑23 Dec 2025 16:19 pm

Ike Hammett wrote: ↑23 Dec 2025 10:07 am

CCard wrote: ↑23 Dec 2025 09:22 am

Ike Hammett wrote: ↑22 Dec 2025 22:29 pm

CCard wrote: ↑22 Dec 2025 21:48 pm

It's been studied to death. Tax payer funded stadiums have a negative overall impact. With all that "revenue" which mostly goes to the owners, there also is added strain on infrastructure. More police presence, more services, more strain on traffic and trash collection. That's just a few of the things. There's no doubt that if brings in tourist revenue as well as an uptick in sales taxes and such, but that stadium has a life expectancy also. So in a decade or 15 years there will have to some some renovations and then the inevitable "we need a new tax payer funded stadium" cry.

Fair enough and I respect your point. This to me isn't necessarily about economics, it's about quality of life and I ask you to respect my point. What is economically beneficial to planting trees, creating a beautiful public park, improving roads and bridges to make them just look better when completely functional etc?

IT MAKES PEOPLE HAPPY!

Maybe it's not the most economically best thing (which is need to investigate) but people want it. Let's look at a bigger picture and include the variables. Do people want nicer things or just what is the best economically? I bet big bucks people and fans want nicer neighborhoods with fun activities far more than just what is best economically. Why would anyone buy the TV that is cool VS a piece of TV that you can watch the same game on? Why would anyone want a 1995 pick up truck VS. A 2026 model? It's kind of better because it makes them feel better.

But tax funded parks benefit everyone that pays taxes. Planting trees benefits everyone. Using tax dollars( that every pays in) to subsidize a billionaires business is just wrong. Especially in this economy when people are getting their food subsidies and healthcare subsidies whacked radically. How you don't see that is beyond me. Everyone wants nice neighborhoods but not everyone wants their tax dollars to go to a billionaires pet hobby. Especially when said billionaire could pay for it him/her self.This isn't rocket science here. We have real people in real need and they deserve for their tax dollars to be used responsibly. Just like the whole gambling thing. It's just a way to funnel money from poor and stupid people to those that don't need or deserve it. The lottery started out as a way to help schools, then once established they cut the taxes for the schools, so the schools got shafted. Now instead of the wealthy paying their share of the tax burden we have the poor and middle class paying more because gambling on the lotter is basically a poor person tax. The wealthy don't play or pay.

I very much understand and am sympathetic to your points, I really am. Ballparks and stadiums attract tax payers, without more taxpayers you have no taxes to collect.

No system is ever going to be perfect. We should definitely always be striving to make things more perfect. Ballparks and stadiums are for everyone and mostly for middle and working classes. They are just a bigger more grand version of your public park or public school gymnasium, library etc. It's for everyone to enjoy. Those ballparks and stadiums are public/ private partnerships because that is what a massive part of the people want. Why should I subsidize your kids school or Healthcare if you don't want to subsidize what is important to me?

America today, I will argue is the greatest civilization of all time, you seem to make it out like we are living in Yemen or Mali or something. My local high school here looks like a cathedral and some say this is the ghetto my downtown St. Louis library looks like a beautiful masterpiece that should be in movies. What more do you really want? because we have it better than kings and queens of the past as just middle class folks.

You mean subsidized professional ballparks where you have to pay to park, get in and watch the games? Yeah, that's not for everyone, and it certainly shouldn't be paid for by tax payers that can't afford groceries, healthcare and education for their kids. School funding being cut, libraries have been decimated with federal cuts(my wife is a librarian), no healthcare for millions of Americans (the only industrialized country in the world that doesn't provide healthcare for its citizens, people struggling to get enough food and other needs. Don't fool yourself, America is not all it's cracked up to be. I went to school in southeast Missouri. We had some classes in trailers. It was hot in the summer, cold in the winter. Things aren't and weren't as rosy as you make out. Right now with people struggling to get by is no time to spend a billion dollars on a stadium for a billionaire. Especially if they won't subsidize a winning effort on the field.

You know when the LA Memorial Coliseum was built in 1923 it cost less than $1 million with an M. Maybe the single greatest investment for infrastructure in LA ever. Just think about how many hundreds of millions of people have visited for different things. These places are like huge community centers, economic anchors, job creators, tourist destinations, symbols of civic pride, and even memorials to war vets like in LA.

Yes that was 1923, today that exact same setup would cost billions with a B. You really trying to compare a building built in 1923 to one built in 2025? Good lord.

Just about every time I go to Cards games I see school cheerleader performances happening, school field trips, boys and girls club outings, school kids singing the anthem, handicapped groups outings etc etc. Is that the type of stuff you mean by funding education and healthcare? Because I'm sure tax money pays for that.

Yes the Cards give away tickets as charity donations for tax write offs, have the kids come and sing so their parents and schools buy tickets, and have give aways to lure people there as well.

You're not really paying to park, you are paying for security to watch your vehicle. It's still a public park and you are paying for the entertainment event you choose to see. I go to lots of games at Busch as I live less than a mile away, people go and just sit in the plaza, dance, walk their dog, kids run the bases of the old stadium, play games etc. All for free.

This can't be a serious paragraph. Each parking lot literally has a sign that says "Make sure to lock up all your valuables as we are not responsible for any stolen items" There's no security, there's just people taking your money for the privilege of parking your car for a few hours. The amount of people who head downtown to just "hang" is becoming less and less each year, and the mayor and alderman do nothing to actually make that number increase.

You should look up pictures of what the Navy Yard in Washington DC or where Camden Yards is before they were there. These things bring those places back from the dead and generate lots of activities and events on what was wasteland. Go to where Sportsman park here in St. Louis and see what it looks like now, kind of ghetto with no activity.

What about places like the Gateway Arch? You have to pay to park, pay to go to the top.

cardinalsfever44 wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:31 pm My question is why would the NFL want a Super Bowl in Kansas City in February?

TheJackBurton wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:38 pm

cardinalsfever44 wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:31 pm My question is why would the NFL want a Super Bowl in Kansas City in February?

They have them in Indiana, why would the NFL want a Super Bowl in Indy in February?

That tends to be the thing for building a new stadium, especially tax payer funded ones, is that you'll get a super bowl to help offset the initial tax payer costs.

cardinalsfever44 wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:40 pm

TheJackBurton wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:38 pm

cardinalsfever44 wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:31 pm My question is why would the NFL want a Super Bowl in Kansas City in February?

They have them in Indiana, why would the NFL want a Super Bowl in Indy in February?

That tends to be the thing for building a new stadium, especially tax payer funded ones, is that you'll get a super bowl to help offset the initial tax payer costs.

And the Super Bowl in Indy was widely panned as one of the worst Super Bowl experiences for fans.

Who wants to go to a Super Bowl in Kansas City in February?

TheJackBurton wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:41 pm

cardinalsfever44 wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:40 pm

TheJackBurton wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:38 pm

cardinalsfever44 wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:31 pm My question is why would the NFL want a Super Bowl in Kansas City in February?

They have them in Indiana, why would the NFL want a Super Bowl in Indy in February?

That tends to be the thing for building a new stadium, especially tax payer funded ones, is that you'll get a super bowl to help offset the initial tax payer costs.

And the Super Bowl in Indy was widely panned as one of the worst Super Bowl experiences for fans.

Who wants to go to a Super Bowl in Kansas City in February?

The people who want to see a Super Bowl?

cardinalsfever44 wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:43 pm

TheJackBurton wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:41 pm

cardinalsfever44 wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:40 pm

TheJackBurton wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:38 pm

cardinalsfever44 wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:31 pm My question is why would the NFL want a Super Bowl in Kansas City in February?

They have them in Indiana, why would the NFL want a Super Bowl in Indy in February?

That tends to be the thing for building a new stadium, especially tax payer funded ones, is that you'll get a super bowl to help offset the initial tax payer costs.

And the Super Bowl in Indy was widely panned as one of the worst Super Bowl experiences for fans.

Who wants to go to a Super Bowl in Kansas City in February?

The people who want to see a Super Bowl?

Enjoy all of those fun activities in Kansas City in February!!! Again, the NFL had the Super Bowl in Indy and it was a disaster. Bad weather, smaller city with not a lot of public transportation, hotels, etc.

TheJackBurton wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:45 pm

cardinalsfever44 wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:43 pm

TheJackBurton wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:41 pm

cardinalsfever44 wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:40 pm

TheJackBurton wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:38 pm

cardinalsfever44 wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:31 pm My question is why would the NFL want a Super Bowl in Kansas City in February?

They have them in Indiana, why would the NFL want a Super Bowl in Indy in February?

That tends to be the thing for building a new stadium, especially tax payer funded ones, is that you'll get a super bowl to help offset the initial tax payer costs.

And the Super Bowl in Indy was widely panned as one of the worst Super Bowl experiences for fans.

Who wants to go to a Super Bowl in Kansas City in February?

The people who want to see a Super Bowl?

Enjoy all of those fun activities in Kansas City in February!!! Again, the NFL had the Super Bowl in Indy and it was a disaster. Bad weather, smaller city with not a lot of public transportation, hotels, etc.

and yet.....they still had it, and will likely get another.

CCard wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 12:48 pm

AnExParrot wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 08:44 am

CCard wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 00:44 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑23 Dec 2025 20:03 pm

CCard wrote: ↑23 Dec 2025 19:39 pm

RamFan08NY wrote: ↑23 Dec 2025 17:44 pm

CCard wrote: ↑22 Dec 2025 20:50 pm It's only a matter of time. Sports teams have no loyalty. They are hired mercenaries. Always looking for the Bigger Better Deal. The Chiefs were one of the original teams to begin with. With all that history and fabulous fan support, it still comes down to how much they can extort from another state. Maybe that's what Dewitt and the others are doing. They're going to wreck the franchise and fan base so there won't be such an uproar when they move to Illinois. Sad times and I'm sure some of you will pooh pooh it off as never happening just as I'm sure there are a lot of fans in northern Missouri who are shocked. Makes one wonder if maybe there's too much emphasis on pro sports.

So, the Chiefs ARE moving, and you seem to be speaking factually. When do you predict the Cards to announce it?

Who knows what's in a billionaires mind? Kroenke didn't let the dust settle too long before he moved the Rams. How long did Bidwell wait before he moved the Big Red? They might never move. But if they were going to move, these are the steps an owner would take first.

Bloom: “alright guys, we are going to make some trades this offseason to build up our farm system and core of young talent.”

You: “oh my lord! They’re moving the team!!!”

Your hyperbole stinks. I never said they would move but I did say that some billionaire owners deliberately do the things that Dewitt is doing in order to move. Gut teams and drive down attendance. Then they can go to MLB and cry about how they can't draw enough to compete. Did you ever see the movie Major League? Maybe you should watch it.

You actually said, in the thread title, if they can move the Chiefs, goodbye Cardinals, as if the two are even remotely related.

Yep...If you can move the NFL royalty Chiefs without a whimper then yes, the Cards are probably on the clock. Sad that you would rather argue semantics than something intelligent.

TheJackBurton wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:18 pm

CCard wrote: ↑22 Dec 2025 21:48 pm

Ike Hammett wrote: ↑22 Dec 2025 21:33 pm

CCard wrote: ↑22 Dec 2025 21:19 pm

Ike Hammett wrote: ↑22 Dec 2025 21:06 pm

CCard wrote: ↑22 Dec 2025 20:50 pm It's only a matter of time. Sports teams have no loyalty. They are hired mercenaries. Always looking for the Bigger Better Deal. The Chiefs were one of the original teams to begin with. With all that history and fabulous fan support, it still comes down to how much they can extort from another state. Maybe that's what Dewitt and the others are doing. They're going to wreck the franchise and fan base so there won't be such an uproar when they move to Illinois. Sad times and I'm sure some of you will pooh pooh it off as never happening just as I'm sure there are a lot of fans in northern Missouri who are shocked. Makes one wonder if maybe there's too much emphasis on pro sports.

Do you even want them here? Doesn't seem like any of you "BFIB" want, like or support them. Who gave up on who?

Schools suffering from shortages, infrastructure crumbling, property taxes going up but tax funded stadiums for billionaires should take precedence? Mercenaries go to the highest bidders. This team had plenty of support when they wanted to win but losing breeds indifference....and they know that.

Haven't been to Kansas City (MO) in a few years maybe 5, but last time I was there I had a good time. Things looked good, people seemed content and as happy as anywhere else. I think your question is better suited for the people of Kanas (the state). I'm on the opposite side of this, pro sports teams bring in revenues, they attract attention, make people feel good, bring a sense of pride to folks (if done right), and greatly impact communities. When i think of Kansas City, I think of the Chiefs and Royals. When I think of Kansas, I think of trash that really has nothing.

It's been studied to death. Tax payer funded stadiums have a negative overall impact. With all that "revenue" which mostly goes to the owners, there also is added strain on infrastructure. More police presence, more services, more strain on traffic and trash collection. That's just a few of the things. There's no doubt that if brings in tourist revenue as well as an uptick in sales taxes and such, but that stadium has a life expectancy also. So in a decade or 15 years there will have to some some renovations and then the inevitable "we need a new tax payer funded stadium" cry.

The new Chiefs dome will be tax payer funded and it quite possibly is the worst tax funded agreement in history.

The state of Kansas will put up 3 billion dollars plus tax incentives to help the Chiefs build the stadium and the surrounding commercial property. For that 3 billion plus tax incentives the Chiefs get the following: The tax breaks, legal rights to all events, food service, parking, and all rents collected from the commercial properties. The Chiefs in return will pay 7 million dollars a year to the state who will then put that money in an account for any repairs and maintenance that may be required in the future.

To summarize: The Chiefs gets everything while the state of Kansas gets a maintenance contract that they don't have to completely fund.

Oh and also, the new stadium won't be up to NFL snuff to hold Super Bowls which is one of the main reasons the state of Kansas agreed to this in the first place.

AnExParrot wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 17:11 pm

CCard wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 12:48 pm

AnExParrot wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 08:44 am

CCard wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 00:44 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑23 Dec 2025 20:03 pm

CCard wrote: ↑23 Dec 2025 19:39 pm

RamFan08NY wrote: ↑23 Dec 2025 17:44 pm

CCard wrote: ↑22 Dec 2025 20:50 pm It's only a matter of time. Sports teams have no loyalty. They are hired mercenaries. Always looking for the Bigger Better Deal. The Chiefs were one of the original teams to begin with. With all that history and fabulous fan support, it still comes down to how much they can extort from another state. Maybe that's what Dewitt and the others are doing. They're going to wreck the franchise and fan base so there won't be such an uproar when they move to Illinois. Sad times and I'm sure some of you will pooh pooh it off as never happening just as I'm sure there are a lot of fans in northern Missouri who are shocked. Makes one wonder if maybe there's too much emphasis on pro sports.

So, the Chiefs ARE moving, and you seem to be speaking factually. When do you predict the Cards to announce it?

Who knows what's in a billionaires mind? Kroenke didn't let the dust settle too long before he moved the Rams. How long did Bidwell wait before he moved the Big Red? They might never move. But if they were going to move, these are the steps an owner would take first.

Bloom: “alright guys, we are going to make some trades this offseason to build up our farm system and core of young talent.”

You: “oh my lord! They’re moving the team!!!”

Your hyperbole stinks. I never said they would move but I did say that some billionaire owners deliberately do the things that Dewitt is doing in order to move. Gut teams and drive down attendance. Then they can go to MLB and cry about how they can't draw enough to compete. Did you ever see the movie Major League? Maybe you should watch it.

You actually said, in the thread title, if they can move the Chiefs, goodbye Cardinals, as if the two are even remotely related.

Yep...If you can move the NFL royalty Chiefs without a whimper then yes, the Cards are probably on the clock. Sad that you would rather argue semantics than something intelligent.

The next time you say something intelligent will be the first. You're great for a chuckle, I gotta give you that.

rockondlouie wrote: ↑23 Dec 2025 09:08 am

cardinalsfever44 wrote: ↑23 Dec 2025 09:06 am

rockondlouie wrote: ↑23 Dec 2025 09:02 am ZERO

REPEAT

ZERO

Chance the Cardinals ever leave St. Louis.

First they'd never move and second MLB would NEVER, EVER okay one of their crown jewel franchises leaving St. Louis.

Anyone who thinks this is happening is loco.

Especially to a smaller market like Nashville, which is already mostly Braves territory. This isn't like the Rams situation where the 2nd biggest market in the league was sitting empty. A move from St. Louis to Nashville makes less than ZERO sense.

No doubt

And the Rams went back HOME to L.A.

Don't even waste one brain cell on this topic, it's NEVER HAPPENING.

AnExParrot wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 17:11 pm

CCard wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 12:48 pm

AnExParrot wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 08:44 am

CCard wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 00:44 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑23 Dec 2025 20:03 pm

CCard wrote: ↑23 Dec 2025 19:39 pm

RamFan08NY wrote: ↑23 Dec 2025 17:44 pm

CCard wrote: ↑22 Dec 2025 20:50 pm It's only a matter of time. Sports teams have no loyalty. They are hired mercenaries. Always looking for the Bigger Better Deal. The Chiefs were one of the original teams to begin with. With all that history and fabulous fan support, it still comes down to how much they can extort from another state. Maybe that's what Dewitt and the others are doing. They're going to wreck the franchise and fan base so there won't be such an uproar when they move to Illinois. Sad times and I'm sure some of you will pooh pooh it off as never happening just as I'm sure there are a lot of fans in northern Missouri who are shocked. Makes one wonder if maybe there's too much emphasis on pro sports.

So, the Chiefs ARE moving, and you seem to be speaking factually. When do you predict the Cards to announce it?

Who knows what's in a billionaires mind? Kroenke didn't let the dust settle too long before he moved the Rams. How long did Bidwell wait before he moved the Big Red? They might never move. But if they were going to move, these are the steps an owner would take first.

Bloom: “alright guys, we are going to make some trades this offseason to build up our farm system and core of young talent.”

You: “oh my lord! They’re moving the team!!!”

Your hyperbole stinks. I never said they would move but I did say that some billionaire owners deliberately do the things that Dewitt is doing in order to move. Gut teams and drive down attendance. Then they can go to MLB and cry about how they can't draw enough to compete. Did you ever see the movie Major League? Maybe you should watch it.

You actually said, in the thread title, if they can move the Chiefs, goodbye Cardinals, as if the two are even remotely related.

Yep...If you can move the NFL royalty Chiefs without a whimper then yes, the Cards are probably on the clock. Sad that you would rather argue semantics than something intelligent.

The next time you say something intelligent will be the first. You're great for a chuckle, I gotta give you that.

CCard wrote: ↑25 Dec 2025 14:05 pm

AnExParrot wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 17:11 pm

CCard wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 12:48 pm

AnExParrot wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 08:44 am

CCard wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 00:44 am

ecleme22 wrote: ↑23 Dec 2025 20:03 pm

CCard wrote: ↑23 Dec 2025 19:39 pm

RamFan08NY wrote: ↑23 Dec 2025 17:44 pm

CCard wrote: ↑22 Dec 2025 20:50 pm It's only a matter of time. Sports teams have no loyalty. They are hired mercenaries. Always looking for the Bigger Better Deal. The Chiefs were one of the original teams to begin with. With all that history and fabulous fan support, it still comes down to how much they can extort from another state. Maybe that's what Dewitt and the others are doing. They're going to wreck the franchise and fan base so there won't be such an uproar when they move to Illinois. Sad times and I'm sure some of you will pooh pooh it off as never happening just as I'm sure there are a lot of fans in northern Missouri who are shocked. Makes one wonder if maybe there's too much emphasis on pro sports.

So, the Chiefs ARE moving, and you seem to be speaking factually. When do you predict the Cards to announce it?

Who knows what's in a billionaires mind? Kroenke didn't let the dust settle too long before he moved the Rams. How long did Bidwell wait before he moved the Big Red? They might never move. But if they were going to move, these are the steps an owner would take first.

Bloom: “alright guys, we are going to make some trades this offseason to build up our farm system and core of young talent.”

You: “oh my lord! They’re moving the team!!!”

Your hyperbole stinks. I never said they would move but I did say that some billionaire owners deliberately do the things that Dewitt is doing in order to move. Gut teams and drive down attendance. Then they can go to MLB and cry about how they can't draw enough to compete. Did you ever see the movie Major League? Maybe you should watch it.

You actually said, in the thread title, if they can move the Chiefs, goodbye Cardinals, as if the two are even remotely related.

Yep...If you can move the NFL royalty Chiefs without a whimper then yes, the Cards are probably on the clock. Sad that you would rather argue semantics than something intelligent.

The next time you say something intelligent will be the first. You're great for a chuckle, I gotta give you that.

You insult everybody because you're insecure in your manhood. I'm sorry for your...eh...inadequacies. LOL

cardinalsfever44 wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:40 pm

TheJackBurton wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:38 pm

cardinalsfever44 wrote: ↑24 Dec 2025 13:31 pm My question is why would the NFL want a Super Bowl in Kansas City in February?

They have them in Indiana, why would the NFL want a Super Bowl in Indy in February?

That tends to be the thing for building a new stadium, especially tax payer funded ones, is that you'll get a super bowl to help offset the initial tax payer costs.

And the Super Bowl in Indy was widely panned as one of the worst Super Bowl experiences for fans.

Who wants to go to a Super Bowl in Kansas City in February?