|
Saints: marching out??? Whodat's view on relocation rumors.
The battle between the State of Louisiana and the New Orleans Saints has really blown up over the last few months of the off-season. Negotiations, which had been heating up since last June when the State had to reach deep to come up with the 15 million dollar subsidy the team was due under the current agreement, finally broke down in late April when Benson announced in an open letter to fans that he was breaking off talks with the State.
Last week, Stanley Rosenberg, Benson’s long-time friend and attorney, announced publicly to a San Antonio paper that Benson has begun talks with San Antonio and Albuquerque about relocation, and that he even received an offer of $1.2 billion from an investor in, you guessed it, Los Angeles. The State has shrugged it off as normal old Benson tactics, but fans seem increasingly concerned. Will the Saints move? Will Benson sell? Are San Antonio, Albuquerque, L.A., and private investors waiting in the wings to snatch the team away from New Orleans? Many fans are mad, mainly at Governor Kathleen Blanco, who they blame for the situation. Is Blanco really some dim-witted politician who doesn’t understand the importance of the Saints? Is she letting up-State anti-New Orleans sentiment get in her way? Has she played the class warfare card one too many times? This is just one man’s opinion but if you’re looking for a culprit in this whole mess look no further than Tom Benson. Let’s try to look at this rationally shall we? Albuquerque, Investors, and San Antonio, oh my! Think that there is any relevance to the fact that the relocation rumors surfaced less than one month after Benson broke off talks with the State? Blanco’s harsh (and on-point) criticism of Benson’s failure to compromise, even after having received a proposal from the State guaranteeing over $400 million in revenue, and having a potential value to the team of roughly $737 million during the next 20 years, left Benson with no other option than to use scare tactics. What you’re seeing is two shrewd negotiators using what they’ve got. Blanco has public sentiment and class warfare – both of which she has used quite well .Benson has the only thing that might just trump that: fear - and he uses it better than most anyone else in the deep south. But will they move, you ask again. Or is Benson just bluffing? He’s bluffing. Absolutely. Albuquerque The idea that the Saints might move to Albuquerque is so clearly unfounded it’s almost laughable. As a metropolitan area, Albuquerque boasts a whopping 735,000 or so people, according to the 2000 census - just over half of the 1.35 million in the New Orleans metropolitan area. They also don’t have that extra million people surrounding the area that New Orleans has in the North Shore and Mississippi Gulf Coast. Albuquerque’s average annual income is below national averages, and the city has a large Hispanic population – a group know to support a different type of football (or futbol). Oh yeah, and there’s one other small problem. Albuquerque doesn’t have an NFL stadium. Last time I checked, that was something that was kind of important to Tom Benson in his quest to “stay competitive� with the other teams in the league. But if you believe Benson and company, a smaller poor market city lacking the fan-base that has been loyal to one of the least successful franchises in history (on the field that is) for nearly 40 years, and without a stadium looks better right now than New Orleans. In reality, Albuquerque’s demographics are so unattractive that the ARENA Football League passed at a chance to put a team in the city. The Albuquerque City Council has twice failed to pass a bill that would build a minor league baseball arena in the downtown area, but we’re supposed to believe that Benson is inches away from calling Ryder. Give me a break. Investors Frankly, I’m not sure what is more laughable, the idea of the Saints in Albuquerque, or the thought that someone would offer $1.2 billion for the team. According to Forbes 2004 NFL Team Valuations List, the Saints are 26th, worth about $627 million. When Dan Snyder bought the Redskins in 1999, he paid the ungodly amount of $800 million – for a team in the Nation’s capital – a team with history, success, and a far bigger following than the Saints. The currently pending Vikings sale was announced three months ago for $625 million. The Vikings have the same stadium woes as the Saints, but they also have a larger market and more successful history. Yet, Tom Benson wants you to believe that someone offered him $1.2 billion, twice what the team is worth and more than any NFL franchise’s current value, and he simply said he had to think about it b/c he’d much prefer to keep the team in New Orleans if he can just squeeze a few million more dollars out of the state??? Sure Tom, if someone offered me $40,000 for my $20,000 headache of a car that can never seem to run right and always needs more money for repairs just to keep up with the other cars on the road, I’d have to think about it also. After all, I love that car. Give me a break. San Antonio Tom Benson has a house in San Antonio. His friends are there. He has business interests there. The city has the Alamo Dome, a stadium that has seated 64,000 for college Bowl Games. The city is larger (1.4 million according to the 2000 census). They already support a successful professional basketball team. Oh no, they could be a real threat, huh? According to many close to San Antonio, the Alamo Dome would require roughly $200 million in renovations to bring it up to NFL Standards. Whether “NFL Standards� are above or below the Super Dome’s current condition is unknown. Last I checked, San Antonio wasn’t offering the Saints $170 million to renovate their stadium to add the suites Benson claims to need so badly just to stay profitable (PS – the Super Dome has 125 suites – current NFL average 137). And what would the Spurs think of renovations to what is currently their stadium? Think Jerry Jones would happily allow a third team in the state, in a city that is decidedly Cowboy-centric at present? The Dome renovation alone, along with the State’s pledge of $267 million in guaranteed payments through 2025 is worth $401 million, and that’s if the renovations don’t make a single extra dollar for the Saints. The team estimates that the renovations would generate another $250 million. There is also an incentive that would allow the Saints to get paid even more based on team performance (no wonder Benson wants no part of the deal). All in all, the likely final figure is $737 million to the Saints in the next 20 years. Is San Antonio willing to meet an offer like that? And offset the huge costs that coincide with moving a sports franchise, pay Benson’s $81 million penalty to move the team before 2010, build him the brand new state of the art training facility that the Saints currently have, give him 100% of the concessions from every event in the goes on in the Alamo Dome, offer no sales taxes on tickets, and pay the team tens of millions of dollars each year just for its presence? I seriously doubt it. The Los Angeles Factor I believe NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue when he says he wants a team in LA by 2009. It won’t be the Saints, though. LA has proven twice that the city couldn’t care less about football. Given the involvement of the commissioner, that’s not likely to happen a third time. You simply won’t get the people of LA to back a team like the New Orleans Saints. If they wouldn’t back the Raiders – one of the most storied franchises in the league, with one of the most eccentric owners, and the flat-out craziest fans – how in the hell can anyone expect them to support the debacle that is the New Orleans Saints? I expect the LA team to be an expansion team. It just doesn’t make sense to move a struggling team and supplant all that baggage. But don’t take my word for it. NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said, “And as far as L.A., the entire L.A. process is a league matter. We have not decided on a stadium site yet, much less a team.� Tom Benson: A lesson in negotiating (and maybe bad faith) At this point, I really don’t know how the State can believe much of what Tom Benson says. His statements, actions, and the reports about the team contradict so sharply, it’s almost comical. For example: for three or four years now, basically since the Saints got the current deal to receive State subsidies to offset all of the “losses� or “costs� associated with playing in an older stadium, Tom Benson has been claiming that he simply needs a new stadium to keep up with the rest of the league. He says that he cannot be profitable in a small market with an old stadium. The numbers suggest just the opposite. According to Forbes, the Saints Operating Income, which essentially measures how much money a team makes after operating expenses (but before taxes and depreciation) was just shy of $30 million in 2002. That figure ranked the team 6th in the league in 2002. In 2003, the Saints slipped to 8th, but their Operating Income rose by nearly 50% to $43.1 million. So for two years the Saints were in the top ten in the league in income earned in a single season, all while Benson was claiming that he couldn’t keep pace with the other teams. As the current Dome renovation negotiations have gone on, the State has discovered that Benson football purchased a 122-foot yacht valued at as much as $20 million. The State has asked to see the team’s books, to verify that they really can’t make profits consistent with the rest of the league. Benson has refused, and this year Forbes is reporting that in 2004, the team estimates only $7.8 million in Operating Profit, which ranks them in the 20’s. Ask yourself – other than these negotiations, what happened that could possibly have erased $35 million of income in a single year? Ticket sales weren’t down significantly from a season ago, though they were down (not $35 million worth), and really, that matters little b/c ticket revenue is shared evenly by all teams. So is TV revenue. The team got a larger payment from the State. So what happened? Did fans buy $35 million fewer t-shirts and hats? Maybe, but I doubt it, and even if so, how is that anyone’s fault but the team’s? It doesn’t stop there. In late April, and throughout the negotiations with the State, Tom Benson has claimed to be loyal to New Orleans – to want to keep the Saints there long-term. In breaking off talks with the State, Benson said that both sides should simply honor the deal in place. Less than a month later, he’s supposedly shopping his team around to other markets! So was he lying when he said he wanted to keep the team in New Orleans? Or is he lying now about shopping it around? To me, this feels an awful lot like bad faith. But I understand why Benson is doing it. It worked for him in the past. In 2001, Benson threatened to move the team to Mississippi where he said he could have a new state-of-the-art NFL stadium built. A few months later, the State paid him the money he wanted (the current deal). He is simply reverting now to the same scare tactics that worked last time. Also, keep in mind that Tom Benson is the chairman of the NFL’s Finance Committee. Do you seriously think a guy that can’t make his team any money and is constantly having to ask for hand-outs would be made chairman of a committee concerned solely with money? Tom Benson has one of the best sweetheart deals in the league right now – maybe the best. He’s knows exactly what he’s doing, and now he simply wants to go back to the well one more time rather than have to do the things it takes to make his team profitable himself (like putting a good product on the field every Sunday). The State has offered a renovated Dome, continue direct payments to the team, and add incentives that would allow the team to make more money if it wins. Benson declined such an offer. He claims to be losing ground on the other owners, and making next to nothing, but won’t open his books to prove it. Forbes reports otherwise. He claims to want to keep his team in New Orleans long-term, but shops it around. He wants the state to honor the deal to him, but he’s willing to renegotiate, just so long as he makes even more money in a more one-sided deal. When the State offers him $400 million in guaranteed money to ease the burden of their current payment, he doesn’t want to negotiate. The team cites one economic impact study done by a professor at UNO that claims that the Saints have hundreds of millions of dollars of economic impact, but it ignores the many others that suggest that teams have nominal if any real economic impact on a market. Benson bought the Saints 20 years ago for $70 million. It’s now worth $627 million, and he’s whining about not making money. Nearly 1000% return in 20 years isn’t enough. But he needs a new stadium to make money, right? Sure, just ask Forbes: “The New Orleans Saints play in the Superdome, one of the oldest stadiums in the NFL. But its old age doesn't prevent team owner Tom Benson from scoring big-time. In 2001, the Saints renegotiated their lease with the state of Louisiana and signed a 10-year agreement. According to this deal, the Saints must pay $186.5 million in annual payments starting at $12.5 million and ultimately rising to $23.5 million at the end of the 10-year period. Oh, yes, and the Saints pay no rent under the new deal - Touchdown!� Folks, something is rotten in the State of Louisiana, but it’s not the governor. To find it, just cruise on over to Airline Drive. You’ll find what stinks boogyin’ all the way to the bank under a bright yellow umbrella. Article Used http://www.neworleanssaints.com/news...articleid=1401 http://www.nola.com/sports/t-p/index...9059236830.xml http://www.abqtrib.com/albq/sp_pro_s...772288,00.html http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpa...9417236830.xml http://www.nola.com/sports/t-p/index...9059236830.xml http://www.forbes.com/free_forbes/2003/0915/081tab.html http://www.forbes.com/free_forbes/2002/0902/070tab.html http://www.bgr.org/Emerging%20Issues...nd%20Games.pdf |
Nice post WhoDat. Just one correction.
Quote:
|
WOW! What a great article, WhoDat.
Benson is becoming as transparent as glass and you nailed him on it. I've said before that I don't really care for Blanco as Governor all that much, but she and her staff hve handled Benson very well. Once again, nice post. Seems like you might have been storing this up since you haven't been able to post in a while. :D |
Gee Scotty, how can you tell? LOL
I'm surprised no one disagrees. Blanco has been viewed as the devil for a while now by a lot of fans. I agreed that the state wasn't doing enough for a long time. Until I really did some research to see what was going on. For a while now, Benson's been giving me reason to change my mind. |
I have been in the minority in that I have been on Blanco's side since the beginning, but I no longer live in the state so I never really saw it as my place to jump fully into that debate. I felt since Foster gave Benson that deal that the state was geting screwed, and here it has come to pass. I know though I have made several statements that Benson is motivated by one thing, greed. Plain and simple. His tactics are not as subtle as they used to be, cause each move in this chess game between he and the state is being played out in the public eye. Not even talking to the Governor when she asked for two meetings after the final offer from the state was announced? Classless. I about fell on the floor laughing when I saw the Albuquerque rumor. That had to be the worst angle ever. And someone offering 1.2 bil for the team? If that was the case, Benson would have sold already cause that is twice what Red is getting for the vikings, and would put Tom in the record books as having gotten the most in return for a sold franchise in any sport. So it is really getting ridiculous on Benson's side at this point. IMO, to blame Kathleen now is just unfair. What more can she do besides just give a greedy owner everything he wants, and financially ruin her state. I suppose she could pull a Mike foster and wait til her term is almost up and then give in to every demand and let the administration after hers figure out how to deal with it, but does anyone really want that?
|
Trying to make Benson look like a greedy white class owner- classless
Leaking a story on a multi-millionaire business man who owns several companies probably totaling near 1 billion dollars in value owning a yacht- classless Trying to make the state burdens and economic woes on one of the biggest companies and maybe the biggest economic boost in the state as part of their problem- classless Starting negotiations out on "possibly building a stadium" when she has NO intentions what so ever to even think about building a new stadium NOR waiting for the results of the study that she SPENT tax dollars on doing.- classless I'm not saying Benson isn't at fault with a few things or a new contract shouldn't be negotiated on but bottom line is that Blanco has gone about the negotiations all wrong with benson this whole time trying to make him publicly look like a bad guy and now he's pissed with her and really doesn't have an urgency to deal with her and I don't blame him. |
Lot of thought went into your post -- I agree with you -- Benson is merely posturing -- he is getting a great deal from the state == has fans willing to stick with him no matter how long we have had mediocre products --- He moves somewhere else and he better win qucikly -- Now -- his position gets a lot better if we have a very good season -- more pressure for Blanco -- but all in all your thoughts on where he has been moving are correct -- I think San Antonio has the best chance but its a longshot at best
|
awesome post amigo. send a copy to poydras ave.
|
Wow, what an thoughtful and well put together post. I guess blackandgold.net is back open for business!
Thanks WhoDat!!! |
benson's bluff needs to be called............
he is all about money,,,,,,,,,,,not the saints............. perhaps a true saint will step forward and buy this puke sheet of an owner out and keep us in our misery for the next 100 yrs........ i've had enough boogie to last me a life time............the only boogie i'd like to see is benson's azz boogying out of town after the sale to keep the saints here..........as far as the saints go, if they should ever go, i will never take another team under my wing and in my heart.........the saints are the first and last............smitty |
Quote:
Forgive my lack of concrete information - though it should be posted on the 1280 AM website soon - I was weaving in and out of downtown traffic on I-10, so my attention was a bit divided. I was also unable to find the article he read on any website (dunno the name of SA's local newspaper). Anyway, from what I could gather, Proposition 3 is a bill commiting future city funds to projects such as roads, public transit and parks. The op-ed piece, written by a San Antonio staff writer, seemed to imply that the passage of said bill made it even more unlikely - if not impossible - that the city of San Antonio could come up with the necessary funds to attract and support an NFL team. The Alamo Dome issue was also raised, and it placed the bare-bones minimum upgrade costs at around $140 million - an amount many feel exceeds the value of the Alamo Dome entirely. |
Quote:
|
Living in San Antone mutey, I can back up your story. I have read the article, and if I can find it, I will post it. Basically, there is a limit to how much taxes can be in a given city in Texas. It's a Texas state law. San Antonio is already at that threshhold, or half a point off or whatever. BAsically, they do not have the ability to raise the funds this year. Could change in the future. The wild card in that is Austin. They have more availability in their tax base and could do something joint with San Antone in between the two, since the drive is like New Orleans to Baton Rouge, with some empty spots in between. But San Antonio alone can't afford to raise it, but that's not to say a wealthy individual couldn't step in and make it happen. Just the city can't do it yet.
|
Nice post Whodat! That was an awful lot of info. Maybe you should submit that to Blanco. She might hire you as a chief negotiator. Good post bro.
|
Great essay.
I'd like to point out that Benson is not as ignorant of the Louisiana State financial situation as some might think. As it stands today, all revenues from oil drilling and refining are based on a budget of $28 per barrel. That cannot change until the next budget cycle which begins in July. The "extra" money that was found is likely to have been "discovered" when the taxes on $51 per barrel were beginning to be realized. By law, the next budget will be based on an average that is closer to $51 per barrel, when futures contracts that the State entered into at the higher prices matured. While it would be short sighted to believe that oil prices will continue to be at that level (see the Great Oil Bust of 1983-1994), developments in China mitigate that short sightedness and the likelihood of high tax revenues is a reasonable going forward assumption. At nearly double the current revenues, there would be well more than enough income to fund the Saints, schools, roads and graft. Sure, Benson's position is about as nakedly greedy as one can have, but he sees the real number of chips in the LA coffers and he's holding out for as much as he can get. What I can't understand is that it would be in Benson's best interest to make the State more attractive by wooing a large or set of medium sized companies to NO/LA so that he can windfall from naming rights and sell those high priced boxes. Taking the money out of the State makes it hard for the State to offer tax incentives for relocation. As a final note, estate tax law in LA, while much improved, makes it hard to transfer wealth. If Benson wanted to move equity to his daughter/heirs, why wouldn't the State make an exemption part of the deal. That would be huge. Moving the Saints out of LA would deny the estate tax portion anyway. Please don't read into this that I am wishing ill health on Mr. Benson or that I am suggesting that his health is in question; he is 78. |
Great post WhoDat.
|
A Little Bird says:
X factor- NFL wants to grow into "other" markets. Mexico is the other market (As stated repeadly by the NFL). An NFL team in a majority Latino city such as San Ant would do wonders for the NFL's desire to crack the Latin market. This move is driven by more then just the "money" (but it really always comes down to the money in the end). The Saints or "Roughriders" as they will be renamed after the move will be positioned to face our nabors to the south and lead to an expansion in Mexico City sometime in the next 5 years. Benson is just a willing tool for this and the impass with the state of LA is just a great smoke screen for the NFL to position itself for growth into this market. :lol: |
LOL - the Roughriders. You mean, a group of wealthy white Americans who scurried on down to Mexico and beat the crap out of them 200 years ago? Yeah, the Mexicans will lover that. :)
Quote:
Quote:
Benson: "I'm so broke. This market sucks. If you don't pay me I'll have to leave b/c I just can't keep up with other teams." State: "OK Tom. Forbes says you're 6th in the NFL in Income, and you won't open your books, but we'll pay you what you want anyway. We trust you." Benson: "Thanks State. PS - that organization that you just paid $15 million to... it just bought a $15 million yacht. There's no correlation, don't worry about it. I'm only telling you b/c someone else already outted me. Otherwise, you never would have known about my secret 122 foot yacht." Now there is good faith if I've ever seen it. Quote:
Moreover, this just shows that you at best, misunderstand what Blanco has said. She NEVER blamed the State's problems on the Saints. She did say that the State has money problems. It does. She also said that it doesn't make sense to pour money into a sports franchise that has questionable ROI when the State needs that money for so many other things. But hey, Benson wants to get richer, so the State should just shut up and pay right? From $70 million in 1985 to $627 million in 2004, and that's not enough. $40 million in Income per year isn't enough. Benson's yacht is only 122 feet after all!!! I hear the some owners have 150 footers!!! Quote:
|
Well I have to say... sure it looks like the they are in position to be moved but there are to many factors at this point that I just don't see it happening at all. Benson will be run out of the state for giving the team up and he has way to many assests in the state. NFL doesn't want Benson running a L.A. team. I simply view all this mess as negociations... and I am not going to lose any sleep over it. Secondly, although I live only a couple of hours from L.A. and I would get to see the Los Angeles Saints more often than not I don't think I could stomach watching that team, I think I would be ill every time I hear the name much less see our Le Fluer being waved in another state.
|
Quote:
Still, the easiest thing for Benson to do is stay. He has been in "extort the state" mode for 4 years now (if not longer). He'll continue to use moving and outside investor threats to further his agenda of becoming the greediest old bastard in the counrty. |
Quote:
Gotcha! |
Let's not forget the Arizona Cardinals, St. Louis Rams, Los Angeles Lakers, and LA Dodgers. Raiders kept the name both moves. Maybe we can pull a Cleveland and but the rights to the name so noone else can have it. But why? :cry:
|
Too much assumption and not enough facts. The opinion article written doesn't add up to everything I've read. And it seems to be slanted in favor of the State of Louiaiana. ( who mysteriously found 360 million dollars. They lose all credibility with me)
WhoDat seems to have a bias when it comes to Mr. Tom Benson. Gov. Blanco is the one who proposed the negotiations in the first place. Benson wanted a new stadium and the only offer he received was to take less money than he was promised by the State of Louisiana in the first place. It's not hard to show Mr. Tom Benson in a negative light. When that's what it appear WhoDat's intentions were to begin with. There's way more to this issue than WhoDat has discussed. And in my opinion he is way off base. |
I'm a big fan of honoring contracts that you signed. This goes for players who hold out and it goes for a state that doesn't like a deal anymore that - after looking at the numbers again - is too expensive to honor.
So obviously the state wants to renegotiate. In my opinion the 2001 contract should only be ripped apart if both parties agree on a new one. The state isn't offering a sweeter deal for Benson so he doesn't want to void the old one. There are a few things that won't happen: a) The Saints (or rather Benson) won't pay a 81 million dollar fine so they can get out of the contract. That's crazy talk and shouldn't even be brought up. All the move talk is simply a precaution in case the state simply declares it won't pay the Saints anymore, thus making it possible for them to move. b) A move to Albuquerque or L.A. I just don't see it. c) Somebody paying 1.2 billion dollars. I mean, come on! The only thing I can think of how they came up with that number is if it wasn't a cash offer but something thrown in that is vastly overpriced, such as a piece of land for a billion when it's actually worth 200 million. Is there one good guy and one bad guy? The gloves came off and both sides aren't picky when trying to impress the public. It all comes down to this: Blanco wants a new deal, but still "We're not going to give them a single legal leg to stand on that would allow the team to leave without paying a penalty" - meaning they (the State) would have to pay for 2 more years. Benson likes the deal. Why should he accept anything less? There's lots of reason for Saints fans not to like Tom Benson - his apparently missing passion for the franchise, the "culture of mediocricy" he supports etc. - but this is a business matter. I can't fault either of the protagonists in this ... negotiation? fight? battle? |
no cloning, in principal I agree with you. Here's the flip side to your player sshould honer their contract argument, shouldn't NFL teams do the same? Shouldn't Troy Brown still be a Patriot, and if he was cut, shouldn;t he gets paid what he was gonna anyway? If you feel all contracts should be honored, then NFL teams should not be allowed to cut players without paying them every cent they agreed to in their contract. They don't, and cut any player when it fits the team, so as per the CBA, a player has the right to hold out.
The second part is that the state should honor the deal. Again, in principal, I agree. But if the deal was made in haste by a DIFFERENT administration, why isn't it in the new administration's right to attempt to make a deal that is more reasonable? Foster threw the house at Benson cause he knew he was getting out, and left the problem for someone else. That would be like Gates selling Microsoft and giving everyone ridiculous raises a couple of days before he turned over the company. Wouldn't it be within thenew owner's rights to take back those raises? That's why I agree with negotiating in this instance. If Blanco had made the deal, then I would be with you. But she didn't, and got left with someone else's terrible deal. It is within her right to attempt to amend that mistake. |
Quote:
Whodat wrote Quote:
|
Quote:
I'm wrong? OK, wouldn't be the first time. Try proving that. You didn't provide any facts that tend to contradict mine. You didn't offer any analysis of the facts that I presented that suggest a different view. So, I say "prove it!" |
Quote:
I'll tell you what .... I'll do one better. Let me gather the "real" facts and I'll post them along with their sources. And I will not slant my opinion one way or the other. There really is no right or wrong on this issue. It's all about which side of the fence you come down on, WhoDat. Obviously you have taken the side of Blanco. Which is pretty evident from your orginal post. No one is on trial here, WhoDat. There are no clear-cut victims or villians here. I'll be back soon with the real rundown on Benson vs. Blanco. |
WhoDat, first I must take my hat off to you for such a well written post. I do disagree with some of its content though. I am a DIEHARD New Orleans Saints fan living in Los Angeles. As a grammar school kid from Saint Frances Cabrini, and then a Brother Martin Crusader, I worked at Tulane Stadium and saw every Saints home game while selling soda, popcorn, peanuts, and eventually Programs. Here is what I think of the current scenario. Benson has a sweetheart of a deal already, courtesy of Gov. Foster, and the truth is, he does not have to do a DAMN thing ... just collect what he has already bargained for and won. While I do realize that making New Orleans pay according to the current deal would pis off some politicians because they would have less money to pad their pockets, the bottom line is that if Benson does nothing except stay, and continue collecting, he has time to complete the 2005 season and possibly see Bianco out of office and see what her succesor is willing to do, (remember, the deadline for getting the deal went out the window when the deal wasn't worked out in time to get N.O. a future Superbowl).
I do think the 1.2 Billion is total BS aimed at posturing for a better deal, but I do have a problem with the perception that L.A. cannot keep a team. First we have to agree WHO exactly you mean by L.A. If you mean the politicians and the lawyers, Maybe I agree, but the Politicians and the lawyers today are different than they were when the Rams and Raiders were in town, so all comparisons are off. Then comes the point of the L.A. Fans, and the people of L.A. The fans in L.A. are as powerless to keep a team there as are the New Orleans fans. The truth of the matter is, the fan in L.A. had little power in what happened to the Rams & Raiders. You can thank Georgia Frontiere and the ever effervescent Al Davis for being flighty, money hungry, and greedy. In case you forget history, the small incorporated city of Irwindale, 20 miles east of Los Angeles, learned an expensive lesson about dealing with Davis. The city gave the Raiders $10 million to show its good faith in 1988, but Davis took the money and left anyway. It turns out the deposit was non-refundable, and Irwindale never got a penny back. Politician's and lawyer's heads rolled back then, and I can guarantee you that the bad taste left in their mouths will not be soon forgotten. The L.A. Rams fans were fanatical and as devoted as any I have seen in the NFL. I attended many Saints/Rams games and got to see the fanbase first hand for many years. If the Saints don't make it to the Los Angeles area, it will be because New Orleans politicians stepped up to the plate and realized what a gem they have in that Saints franchise. It really is all about money and timing, and the fans do not control that. Even though I live in L.A., I would hate to see the Saints leave New Orleans because I just think it would not be the same. There is a chemistry that is the Black and Gold and the Crescent City, and no one should ever try to change that, otherwise the curse will follow the Saints wherever they move to, and it will triple in severity. So, as a fan, all I am going to do is enjoy what promises to be a great 2005 season, and see what transpires afterwards. I predict that the 2005 Saints WILL make the playoffs. I think the Defense you will see this year will be more like the last 4 games of last season than the beginning, barring injuries of course. Brown on the "O" line should improve the size of the holes Deuce has to run through, and we know how hard it is to bring Deuce down once he gets a full head of steam. A blossoming Zach Hilton, and an speedy Devery Henderson should make for some exciting targets for Brooks, or McPherson, (who I predict will see some playing time this year). McPherson will become another crowd favorite with his electric dazzling play making, very much like Doug Flutie was when he first came back into the NFL. So you guys hold the fort down for me and keep the Crawfish boils and soft-shelled crab Po Boys (which I miss tremendously) flowing. I will see you this season. |
Welcome aboard NOSaints, nice post. I agree with some of it, disagree with some, but nice post.
One of my best friends is a Brother Martin Crusader. Matter of fact, I lived in Gentilly a couple blocks past the cemetary cross the street from Brother Martin, Warrington Dr. Right next to Dillard. I was a De La Salle Cavalier myself for 8th grade, made some bad decisions about which parent to live with, and finished at public school. Grammar School I went to Mater Dolorosa on Carrolton and Oak(it's closed now and has been for years) and St. Stephen's on Napoleon and Camp. I was just out in Diamond Bar, Cali a few months back for business. You familiar at all with Diamond Bar? Went to Medieval Times and on a tour of LA while I was there. Saw the Forum, Tar Pits, went to Rodeo Dr. It was fun. Glad to have you aboard. |
saintswhodi, the system of signing bonuses pretty much guarantees that players don't get a raw deal. They may get cut when they reach the last 2 years of a contract with ridiculous cap numbers, but even underperformers are often kept on a team because of the money invested in them.
Regarding the problem at hand, I may be reaching a little high, but I honestly believe that honoring the contracts the outgoing administration agreed to - or breaking them - is a problem of democracy. It's way more problematic in international treaties, say the Kyoto Protocol, where you have many players and just when everybody could agree to a compromise there's an election and although the contracts have been signed by 100 nations they could as well be ripped or burned because the most important country doesn't honor it. Anyway, back to Blanco and Foster. Foster's contract with Benson isn't that of a lunatic, it's just very sweet for the Saints owner. And Blanco isn't about to just ignore it, she wants to renegotiate. She has every right to. And Benson has every right to wait for an offer that he likes. Could someone explain to me exactly how the 2007 escape clause works? The state says "Deal's off", they don't have to pay anymore and the Saints are free to move? Isn't that basically what would happen if they simply refused to pay? Granted that would look worse ... |
All I know is what has been stated before a letter of intent to move has not been sighned yet. Secondly it takes more than a year to relocate a franchise everyone knows that. The Director of the Alamo Dome has not been contacted about the move. Another thing a deal would have to be in place within 90 days of the end of the 2005 season. If anything it would be really disorganized to move a franchise this quick. I must say though has the present Saints franchise been anything but unorganised except for maybe the salary cap but you know what kind of a money pincher Benson is. Hey rumor is he loves his filet mignon steaks with lemon on the side. Hey does that come with a long island icetea too?
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:16 PM. |
Copyright 1997 - 2020 - BlackandGold.com