Chiefs bound for Kansas?

[jetlord 10,207]

On yesterday's podcast, Matt Derrick make quite a bit of noise about how Kansas has gotten its act together to make a run at moving the Chiefs across the state line.  Don't know how deep that goes but several good points were made.  Kansas has sports betting while Missouri is debating it and couldn't enact enabling legislation before next May if even then.  Kansas has government officials and lobbyists pushing hard to include the Chiefs in their sports team funding while Missouri doddles, debates, and lets it all fall on Jackson County.  We have a close social friend who served as a Jackson Co. legislator and has been invited to be involved in devising plans to present the Chiefs and Royals to ensure they remain in the county.  He's not optimistic at this time.  Thoughts???

I realize this has been discussed here before so maybe the mods want to merge this post into another thread.  

[reesebobby 5,661]

It's also Taylor Swift's favorite place.  Not positive if that's why though. 

[jetlord 10,207]

49 minutes ago, reesebobby said:

It's also Taylor Swift's favorite place.  Not positive if that's why though. 

Because she can get burnt ends after the game?

[oldtimer 8,683]

on the edge of LR material here but 

On Tuesday, the top Republican lawmakers in Kansas announced that they had reached out to the Chiefs organization to urge the team to consider moving across the state line. To sweeten the deal, the state could consider issuing hundreds of millions of dollars in bonds to finance construction of a new stadium.

Gov. Mike Parson, a Republican and Chiefs superfan, has said he will “do what he can to keep the Chiefs in Missouri.”

But he’s leaving office this year due to term limits. So with the Chiefs’ current lease at Arrowhead set to expire in January 2031, the issue could ultimately fall into the lap of whoever is elected to replace him in November.

And there is a deep divide among the candidates about what, if anything, to do.

Kansas legislative leaders draw up play to lure Kansas City Chiefs away from Missouri

Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft, the leading Republican candidate for governor, said he is “opposed to providing taxpayer subsidies to keep sports teams.”

Instead, Ashcroft said, if elected he would focus on public safety, education and lowering taxes “so that Missouri will be a destination state for teams, their players and all economic freedom loving Americans.”

State Sen. Bill Eigel, also a Republican candidate, said he’s confident that “the Chiefs will make the right decision and remain in Missouri, but it won’t be because of taxpayer handouts for sports teams or stadiums on my watch.”

Government, Eigel said, “shouldn’t be in the business of picking winners and losers. I’m going to ensure Missouri is a place where all people can thrive.”

On the other side of the issue in the GOP primary is Lt. Gov. Mike Kehoe. His campaign manager, Derek Coats, said Missouri deserves a governor “who will fight for jobs and economic growth.”

“Mike Kehoe will not watch passively as other states poach our businesses,” Coats said. “As governor, he will use every tool at his disposal to ensure Missouri is a state that welcomes investment, creates jobs and spurs economic growth.”

State Rep. Crystal Quade, a Democrat running for governor, said that any candidate who “claims they don’t care about the Arrowhead-sized hole losing the Chiefs would create is lying. 

“We need to elect leaders who will work with the Chiefs,” she said, “to make sure all sides get a fair deal and keep our Super Bowl Champs playing football in Missouri for decades to come.”

Springfield businessman Mike Hamra, who is also a candidate in the Democratic primary, said Missourians take pride in being the home to the Chiefs.

“State leaders,” he said, “should explore every reasonable option to keep the Chiefs in Missouri.”

[mex 65,580]

This would be a win-win.

[jetlord 10,207]

14 hours ago, mex said:

This would be a win-win.

????  Personally, I like having the Chiefs play on our side of town, but since we're no longer season ticket holders, it's also nice to see Johnson County and Kansas pay something for the stadium.  If they get a great facility like Las Vegas, it doesn't matter much where it is as long as it's in the KC area.  

[oldtimer 8,683]

1 hour ago, jetlord said:

????  Personally, I like having the Chiefs play on our side of town, but since we're no longer season ticket holders, it's also nice to see Johnson County and Kansas pay something for the stadium.  If they get a great facility like Las Vegas, it doesn't matter much where it is as long as it's in the KC area.  

my bet it'd be Wyandotte Cnty up by the Racetrack but yea let them Free Staters pay the bills

[mex 65,580]

4 hours ago, jetlord said:

????  Personally, I like having the Chiefs play on our side of town, but since we're no longer season ticket holders, it's also nice to see Johnson County and Kansas pay something for the stadium.  If they get a great facility like Las Vegas, it doesn't matter much where it is as long as it's in the KC area.  

I just want them to be the KANSAS CITY CHIEFS.

Not the San Antonio whatevers. 

Long as they stay close enough so that happens, I'll support it with my one ticket purchase every 3 years. 

[KC Warpaint 3,234]

 i would say that anyone who vows to work with the chiefs so that they stay in Missouri has a leg up in the race, but pretty sure that folks in St Louis etc would not give two fucks about what happens to the chiefs.

[Spfdchiefsfan 621]

10 hours ago, KC Warpaint said:

 i would say that anyone who vows to work with the chiefs so that they stay in Missouri has a leg up in the race, but pretty sure that folks in St Louis etc would not give two fucks about what happens to the chiefs.

I don't think that is 100% true.  I know a lot of people in STL have become Chiefs fans after what Kronkie did to them.  They were friends of mine that said at least they are good for Missouri,  I bet you'd be surprised how many people there like them, especially now that they are winning!

[KC Warpaint 3,234]

3 hours ago, Spfdchiefsfan said:

I don't think that is 100% true.  I know a lot of people in STL have become Chiefs fans after what Kronkie did to them.  They were friends of mine that said at least they are good for Missouri,  I bet you'd be surprised how many people there like them, especially now that they are winning!

I would think some on that side of the state would want the NFL to expand back to St. Louis or maybe they became bears fans

[jetlord 10,207]

For those still interested, there's a pretty clear explanation about the push by Kansas on Arrowhead Pride worth reading.  Too long to paste the whole thing here.

https://www.arrowheadpride.com/2024/6/9/24173169/chiefs-news-everything-we-know-about-kansas-stadium-bill 

[moons314 2,463]

On 6/7/2024 at 10:24 AM, jetlord said:

????  Personally, I like having the Chiefs play on our side of town, but since we're no longer season ticket holders, it's also nice to see Johnson County and Kansas pay something for the stadium.  If they get a great facility like Las Vegas, it doesn't matter much where it is as long as it's in the KC area.  

If the get a facility like Vegas, we won't be able to do anything other than watch the games on tv, because tickets and PSL's will kill us average blue collar fans off.  I really hope my state lures the Royals to go out by the track, and the Chiefs get the sports complex to themselves.  

If I understand the STAR bonds correctly, it's not county residents or anything like that who end up paying, there is a special sales tax in that business district that funds the loans.  That means that everyone that shops at legends or goes to a game out there would be footing the bill.  Personally, I like it, because it allows people who don't want to pay for it to opt out, if you don't go you aren't paying for it.  I'm burnt the eff out on the "let the billionaires pay for their own stadiums" tag line coming from a lot of Kansas Republicans.  It's a narrow minded view that's in opposition of how the world works, and I'm sure the same people saying it were in favor of Mars, Target, etc getting 25 year deals of no property taxes to build distribution centers south of Topeka.  Inconsistent asshats are annoying af. 

[jetlord 10,207]

1 hour ago, moons314 said:

If the get a facility like Vegas, we won't be able to do anything other than watch the games on tv, because tickets and PSL's will kill us average blue collar fans off.  I really hope my state lures the Royals to go out by the track, and the Chiefs get the sports complex to themselves.  

If I understand the STAR bonds correctly, it's not county residents or anything like that who end up paying, there is a special sales tax in that business district that funds the loans.  That means that everyone that shops at legends or goes to a game out there would be footing the bill.  Personally, I like it, because it allows people who don't want to pay for it to opt out, if you don't go you aren't paying for it.  I'm burnt the eff out on the "let the billionaires pay for their own stadiums" tag line coming from a lot of Kansas Republicans.  It's a narrow minded view that's in opposition of how the world works, and I'm sure the same people saying it were in favor of Mars, Target, etc getting 25 year deals of no property taxes to build distribution centers south of Topeka.  Inconsistent asshats are annoying af. 

Didn't the Rams have PSLs when they built the dome in STL?  How did the fans come out when the team moved back to LA?  I hadn't seen anything that indicated that PSLs were in the equation for the Chiefs if they built new.  The reference to the Vegas stadium was about the venue, not the financing.  

[oldtimer 8,683]

12 hours ago, jetlord said:

Didn't the Rams have PSLs when they built the dome in STL?  How did the fans come out when the team moved back to LA?  I hadn't seen anything that indicated that PSLs were in the equation for the Chiefs if they built new.  The reference to the Vegas stadium was about the venue, not the financing.  

at a quick glance it seems PSLs are or are rapidly becoming the new normal I do know the Bills, Ravens as well as the Texans have them  here is tid bit about PSLs and later on down from another site the list of teams who have them. Sorry it did not cut n paste the way I had hoped

https://tiqassist.com/personal-seat-licenses-guide/

Personal Seat Licenses 101

Are you a die-hard NFL fan looking to purchase season tickets for your favorite team? If so, you need to learn about personal seat licenses (PSLs) and why they are important. What is a personal seat license? Simply put, it’s a way franchise owners have found to help cover the costs of their new stadiums by putting some of the burden on their fanbase. Personal seat licenses, which you must pay for, enable you to purchase season tickets at a given stadium. PSLs not only give you first dibs on season ticket plans, but they also allow you early access to any concerts or events at the stadium for that year.

Unfortunately, PSLs have become the new norm — and they are causing the ticket prices to skyrocket. Although there are still some outliers, most NFL teams now require personal seat licenses in order to purchase season tickets. If you own a PSL and do not wish to renew season tickets next year, your license gets forfeited back to the team unless you are able to sell it to another fan.

 

Select Your Team

• ATLANTA

  Falcons

• BALTIMORE

  Ravens

• CAROLINA

  Panthers

• CHICAGO

  Bears

• CINCINNATI

  Bengals

• CLEVELAND

  Browns

• DALLAS

  Cowboys

• HOUSTON

  Texans

• LAS VEGAS

  Raiders

• LOS ANGELES

  Rams

• MINNESOTA

  Vikings

• NEW YORK

  Giants

• NEW YORK

  Jets

• PHILADELPHIA

  Eagles

• PITTSBURGH

  Steelers

• SAN FRANCISCO

  49ers

• SEATTLE

  Seahawks

• TENNESSEE

  Titans

 

 

[West 6,713]

it is all about the money.....

w

[jetlord 10,207]

Thanks, OT.  Still wonder what happens when the team moves like the Rams did from STL.  If the team can sell 60,000 PSLs for $5000/seat that would make a dent on the cost.  I'm all for the users paying more than the general public, but it's a bummer to spend all that so the owners can increase their team's value and the players can haul in an extra million to buy a Lambo to race.  

[West 6,713]

It is the market....The NFL Owners were rich before they bought their team.  They understand how to make money and they use their franchise as a cash printing press.

This is easy to bite into when your team is winning Super Bowls and much more difficult if your team sucks. Sooner or later, there will be legislation that forces owners to sell a % of seats to the downtrodden masses.....Think of it as rent control.

The NFL is expanding its market on a global basis and Mr. Mahomes, Mr Kelce and Ms Swift are very effective ambassadors....

w

[jetlord 10,207]

1 hour ago, West said:

It is the market....The NFL Owners were rich before they bought their team.  They understand how to make money and they use their franchise as a cash printing press.

This is easy to bite into when your team is winning Super Bowls and much more difficult if your team sucks. Sooner or later, there will be legislation that forces owners to sell a % of seats to the downtrodden masses.....Think of it as rent control.

The NFL is expanding its market on a global basis and Mr. Mahomes, Mr Kelce and Ms Swift are very effective ambassadors....

w

Section 8 seating among the luxury boxes?  🙂

[West 6,713]

Its gonna happen ....NFL is second only to the NBA in Wokeness.

[xen 1,010,218]

West is just mad he'll have to sit next to us plebeians now

[West 6,713]

You forget, I am the original plebeian.....way back before it was cool.

[mex 65,580]

3 hours ago, West said:

You forget, I am the original plebeian.....way back before it was cool.

Can vouch.

Also, does your suite have internet access so we can post on this forum?

[West 6,713]

Suite?..... I wish. 

[xen 1,010,218]

1 hour ago, West said:

Suite?..... I wish. 

That was a typo.  He meant "suit".  He wants to plug in to your pants.