Haslam is no spring chicken.  He will be 75 if/when the new stadium is completed.  And it will take many more years to build Jimmy's World.  I suppose he can pass ownership to one of his children when he leaves this world.

 

Edited October 22, 2024Oct 22 by LibertyBlvd

I think the Browns leaving NEO is very unlikely. After all the trouble the league went through to bring the Browns back to Cleveland, I think the Haslams would encounter a lot of resistance from the NFL at large if they tried to move the Browns out of Cleveland. 

Btw, it would have been nice to view the current stadium renovation renderings which the Mayor and County Exec have seen. Would be a shame if that was ever somehow leaked into the public domain....

14 minutes ago, snakebite said:

Btw, it would have been nice to view the current stadium renovation renderings which the Mayor and County Exec have seen. Would be a shame if that was ever somehow leaked into the public domain....

That sounds like a job for @KJP

1 hour ago, snakebite said:

Btw, it would have been nice to view the current stadium renovation renderings which the Mayor and County Exec have seen. Would be a shame if that was ever somehow leaked into the public domain....

It would have to be from someone in the Haslam Sports Group. I've heard they're spectacular though and that the stadium is unrecognizable. 

Spectacular and yet, still not good enough for our Jimmy. He must be holding out for really spectacular.

And what will all this cost? Seeking an injunction, court fees, legal fees, endless appeals. Figure $500,000-$2,000,000.

 

https://fox8.com/news/i-team-city-of-cleveland-going-to-court-to-keep-the-browns/

 

First on Fox 8: CLE going to court to keep the Browns

City of Cleveland going to court. https://fox8.com/news/i-team-city-of-cleveland-going-to-court-to-keep-the-browns/

PR move! Turn up the temperature on them while they are already cooking on the frying pan. I'm sure they don't really want to go to court and have the law overturned as unconstitutional...

Then why have the law at all? I don't think litigation is a good use of city resources, but the law is pretty poor leverage if it's never validated.

6 minutes ago, TBideon said:

Then why have the law at all? I don't think litigation is a good use of city resources, but the law is pretty poor leverage if it's never validated.

Legislature pass laws all the time which are unconstitutional.  Is not until the law is eventually applied that a court can rule on the constitutionality. Courts do not issue advisory opinions. You actually have to have a case or controversy.

Edited October 22, 2024Oct 22 by Htsguy

The only winners in this litigation will be the lawyers

Just now, B767PILOT said:

The only winners in this litigation will be the lawyers

Well, there’s clearly nothing wrong with that.🥴

4 minutes ago, B767PILOT said:

The only winners in this litigation will be the lawyers

Can the city law director file the suit themselves?   Or would they need to retain outside counsel.    

Either way it's forcing Haslam to spend money on lawyers to defend it plus file any appeals, while the city law director is playing with house (taxpayer) money.  

 

Between the attorney fees and more negative PR, It would certainly add to the stack at the negotiating table. 

Don't forget this law was utilized a handful of years ago. The owners of the Columbus Crew wanted to move the team to Austin Texas. City of Columbus

sued using the Modell Law. ( New ownership was Found - Jimmy Haslam ( part owner ) and the team was sold to the new ownership group. Columbus saved the Crew from moving, Jimmy Haslam became part owner of the team and a new Columbus Crew state of the art MLS stadium was built. So Jimmy Haslam has been involved in the Modell Law.  The difference this time is that 1) he is on the other side of the law and 2) the move involves moving to the Cleveland Suburbs                ( basically across the street from City of Cleveland proper at the airport. So no one knows if this law will be enforced since they are staying in the region. Since Jimmy has been part of the Modell Law before in Columbus maybe he caves in and stays downtown if he feels the law would be enforced.   

1 hour ago, TBideon said:

And what will all this cost? Seeking an injunction, court fees, legal fees, endless appeals. Figure $500,000-$2,000,000.

 

https://fox8.com/news/i-team-city-of-cleveland-going-to-court-to-keep-the-browns/

 

First on Fox 8: CLE going to court to keep the Browns

This tells me Jimmy and the Browns def negotiated in bad faith. You only make this move if the relationship is already soured. 

7 hours ago, MostlyThere14 said:

Definitely starting to feel like they're either staying downtown or moving out of town. Not sure where Jimmy would get what he wants since a lot of other municipalities feel similarly about publicly funding stadiums. It also probably works in Cleveland's favor that the organization is a laughing stock and I could see other cities saying we're not paying $2B for the lowly Browns.

If Jimmy moves out of the region because he can't get public funding for his private money making entertainment complex and parking lots, then he's an even bigger ass and con artist than I've imagined. Moving a team because you don't public support for a private money making entertainment complex is not a legitimate reason for franchise relocation when he has options of renovation or can downscale his Brook Park plans. 

Owners like Jimmy are criminal snake billionares. The fact NEO thinks he's the best owner of the 3 is quite stupifying. 

9 minutes ago, AsDustinFoxWouldSay said:

If Jimmy moves out of the region because he can't get public funding for his private money making entertainment complex and parking lots, then he's an even bigger ass and con artist than I've imagined. Moving a team because you don't public support for a private money making entertainment complex is not a legitimate reason for franchise relocation when he has options of renovation or can downscale his Brook Park plans. 

Owners like Jimmy are criminal snake billionares. The fact NEO thinks he's the best owner of the 3 is quite stupifying. 

In the one professional sport that fosters a climate where every single team can compete every year, based on everyone gets the same amount of TV money, HE FAILS EVERY YEAR.

 

He’s quite possibly the worst owner in professional sports now that Dan Snyder is out. 

3 hours ago, B767PILOT said:

The only winners in this litigation will be the lawyers

Billable hours are always undefeated.

Haven't we all known this is exactly who Jimmy Haslam III is ever since the Pilot Flying J rebate fiasco?

Edited October 23, 2024Oct 23 by jam40jeff

https://www.wkyc.com/article/sports/nfl/browns/cleveland-city-council-fights-back-browns-propose-new-stadium-brook-park/95-f0c62102-225d-4fdb-aae1-91f91bb876fb

 

"Meanwhile, a source within City Hall tells 3News the Haslams met with several big name business leaders Monday night, and while we don't know all the details, they were presenting their case for the Browns' future in Brook Park and their vision for the stadium."

 

The tenant leaching process is underway.

9 minutes ago, snakebite said:

https://www.wkyc.com/article/sports/nfl/browns/cleveland-city-council-fights-back-browns-propose-new-stadium-brook-park/95-f0c62102-225d-4fdb-aae1-91f91bb876fb

 

"Meanwhile, a source within City Hall tells 3News the Haslams met with several big name business leaders Monday night, and while we don't know all the details, they were presenting their case for the Browns' future in Brook Park and their vision for the stadium."

 

The tenant leaching process is underway.

Or is it more of a pressure campaign trying to get local business leaders to help push elected and the public on the move?

Hey Heinen's brothers, how much do you like planes and traffic?

56 minutes ago, snakebite said:

https://www.wkyc.com/article/sports/nfl/browns/cleveland-city-council-fights-back-browns-propose-new-stadium-brook-park/95-f0c62102-225d-4fdb-aae1-91f91bb876fb

 

"Meanwhile, a source within City Hall tells 3News the Haslams met with several big name business leaders Monday night, and while we don't know all the details, they were presenting their case for the Browns' future in Brook Park and their vision for the stadium."

 

The tenant leaching process is underway.

 

Are they local or out-of-town business leaders? Either way, it could also be about securing private equity funding for Brook Park. The Haslams are allowed to secure anywhere from a 3-10 percent equity stake. Based on the Browns being valued at $6 billion, that's anywhere from $180 million to $600 million.

It's interesting they picked to feature the resident at the town hall with Bibb who says they shouldn't pay anything to keep the team and the Browns should just leave. https://www.wkyc.com/article/sports/nfl/browns/cuyahoga-county-executive-chris-ronayne-against-cleveland-browns-proposed-move-downtown-brook-park/95-392f5259-41d6-4d44-8cf7-4a5376df6e89

 

 

 

 

 

Seems like County is on board with Bibb. Guess Cleveland has a few model citizens after all, just not on the field.

 

Next up, State. At some point DeWine will have to comment, and the Bengals funding has all the momentum. Hopefully Columbus can pressure him to refuse the extortion. 

 

Brookpark better call FedEx and start printing some bonds.

53 minutes ago, TBideon said:

Seems like County is on board with Bibb. Guess Cleveland has a few model citizens after all, just not on the field.

 

Next up, State. At some point DeWine will have to comment, and the Bengals funding has all the momentum. Hopefully Columbus can pressure him to refuse the extortion. 

 

Brookpark better call FedEx and start printing some bonds.

Wonder if the Lerner families are also PO’d for selling to Jimmy. Maybe they should speak out. They cleaned up the Modell mess after facilitating the B’more move and maybe they can help again since they dropped HSG on our long-suffering city.

I think they have as much interest in Cleveland as the Ratners.

 

The ship has sailed with those families.

hopefully the city lawsuit is a pr squeeze to get haslam to pay for the stadium demo and save face. if so perhaps a compromise settlement can be reached. 

 

as for the stadium renovation renders, that would be very interesting to see what was offered. i’m sure we will get them at some point.

Am I reading this correctly? Feel dirty even reading this s**t but as Ruiter is clearly a Haslam mouthpiece his info seems as close as any currently. The article states that the Brook Park dome would cost 2.4bn and a dome on Burke would cost 3.3bn!? Are they adding in the inevitable either way closure of Burke into this to suit their costing argument or am I missing something that adds an extra 900m? 

 

https://www.audacy.com/923thefan/sports/cleveland-browns/city-of-cleveland-plans-to-sue-to-keep-browns?utm_campaign=sharebutton&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_term=WKRKFM

20 minutes ago, mrnyc said:

hopefully the city lawsuit is a pr squeeze to get haslam to pay for the stadium demo and save face. if so perhaps a compromise settlement can be reached. 

 

as for the stadium renovation renders, that would be very interesting to see what was offered. i’m sure we will get them at some point.

1.2bn from Haslam/Browns, another 600m let's say from private equity possibly so they'd need another 600m from the State. Maybe they squeeze the NFL for another 1-200m and not sure the Browns figure would include the NFL contribution anyway. 

 

Given the amount of money being requested I think it's in the public transparency that we see the alternative renderings. This is far beyond confidential mickey mouse back room s**t now.

4 minutes ago, snakebite said:

Am I reading this correctly? Feel dirty even reading this s**t but as Ruiter is clearly a Haslam mouthpiece his info seems as close as any currently. The article states that the Brook Park dome would cost 2.4bn and a dome on Burke would cost 3.3bn!? Are they adding in the inevitable either way closure of Burke into this to suit their costing argument or am I missing something that adds an extra 900m? 

 

https://www.audacy.com/923thefan/sports/cleveland-browns/city-of-cleveland-plans-to-sue-to-keep-browns?utm_campaign=sharebutton&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_term=WKRKFM

 

 

just a guess but maybe because burke would need additional fill? my understanding has always been the infill for burke is not in as good shape for any redevelopment as even the area around the current stadium. 

4 minutes ago, snakebite said:

1.2bn from Haslam/Browns, another 600m let's say from private equity possibly so they'd need another 600m from the State. Maybe they squeeze the NFL for another 1-200m and not sure the Browns figure would include the NFL contribution anyway. 

 

Given the amount of money being requested I think it's in the public transparency that we see the alternative renderings. This is far beyond confidential mickey mouse back room s**t now.

 

 

given public property and money is involved i would think the renders legally have to be released.

 

at some point.

 

and yeah thats the aggravation.

21 minutes ago, mrnyc said:

 

 

given public property and money is involved i would think the renders legally have to be released.

 

at some point.

 

and yeah thats the aggravation.

Would we be able to get the plans through a FOIA request?

1 hour ago, snakebite said:

Am I reading this correctly? Feel dirty even reading this s**t but as Ruiter is clearly a Haslam mouthpiece his info seems as close as any currently. The article states that the Brook Park dome would cost 2.4bn and a dome on Burke would cost 3.3bn!? Are they adding in the inevitable either way closure of Burke into this to suit their costing argument or am I missing something that adds an extra 900m? 

 

https://www.audacy.com/923thefan/sports/cleveland-browns/city-of-cleveland-plans-to-sue-to-keep-browns?utm_campaign=sharebutton&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_term=WKRKFM

Yes let’s call BS on the mouthpiece. Are we to believe Jimmy completed engineering and cost estimates in less than 1 month since Bibb offered Burke? This just proves Jimmy has had their end game decided long ago at the starting line and all since then has been a slow Kabuki theatre production. If the NFL can build SoFi surrounded by fault lines with earthquake resistant engineering it could be done on the lakefront here contrary to the repeated excuse about the fill stability underneath that they expect to be accepted as gospel.

https://www.hksinc.com/our-news/articles/seven-surprising-things-about-sofi-stadiums-design/

interesting the SoFi roof hovers above and around the stadium not touching it via 37 earthquake-resistant columns. Now do similar to our existing stadium or new next door at Burke. Show us the engineering and cost studies especially the one allegedly just done on Burke in a matter of weeks. Prove the mouthpiece’s estimate of $3billion wasn’t just pulled out of their hoo-ha as they pull another fast one on the Cleveland rubes.

I think we all know Burke was neither a serious offer by Bibb nor received any real consideration by Haslam.

 

Just too many complications and hassle for limited benefit, and Jimmy didn't want to be 85 for game one. And Bibb knew that. And we knew that.

 

If Cleveland ever closes the airport, it's because there's true, realized demand for the land, not to appease a lying businessman or enthusiastic boosters who imagine some kind of Candyland development.

2 hours ago, Mogradal said:

Would we be able to get the plans through a FOIA request?

 

i would think so, but that would take time — and likely the city would try to stall it as long as they can.

 

but hey, the quicker someone files one of those requests, the quicker they have to act on it. 👍

Interesting editorial from Crains, basically suggesting negotiations are more ongoing than they appear. Even the Model law they post is likely intended more for negotiation leverage than fully intended to go to trial. 

 

https://www.crainscleveland.com/commentary/crains-editorial-driving-stadium-leverage

2 hours ago, Ethan said:

Interesting editorial from Crains, basically suggesting negotiations are more ongoing than they appear. Even the Model law they post is likely intended more for negotiation leverage than fully intended to go to trial. 

 

https://www.crainscleveland.com/commentary/crains-editorial-driving-stadium-leverage

None of that necessarily means that the city of Cleveland's offer of $367 million for renovation of the existing lakefront stadium (plus nearly $100 million for future renovations), or a potential pivot to a new stadium on part of the land where Burke Lakefront Airport now sits, is fully in play. The Burke gambit, in particular, seems like a dead letter. But we don't believe the conversation about a Browns stadium in Cleveland is done. Keep talking.

Browns go to court to clear path to Brook Park https://fox8.com/news/i-team/browns-file-suit-against-cleveland-to-clear-way-for-move-to-brook-park-i-team/

So now it's a $3-3.5 billion project, which includes $2 billion in private funding? 

 

 

We hate you too Dave.

 

Asking the judge for clarity on the Modell Law.  https://www.news5cleveland.com/

https://www.cleveland19.com/2024/10/24/cleveland-browns-file-lawsuit-get-clarity-modell-law/

22 minutes ago, simplythis said:

Asking the judge for clarity on the Modell Law.  https://www.news5cleveland.com/

https://www.cleveland19.com/2024/10/24/cleveland-browns-file-lawsuit-get-clarity-modell-law/

let the games begin...

6 minutes ago, Willo said:

let the games begin...

The fact that the Browns issued a statement and said the Modell Law "adds uncertainty" means they do NOT feel good about it

Nice supportive article in C-bus Dispatch.  

 

https://www.dispatch.com/story/sports/columns/2024/10/24/city-of-cleveland-positions-itself-to-sue-browns-over-potential-move/75808610007/

 

Some excerpts:

...Their “desire to make a transformative investment in Greater Cleveland and the entire Northeast Ohio region” is an optimal solution for them, first and foremost. Opening up the lakefront for development has merit – there may be no better parcel in the state for such a purpose – but there are other potential stadium solutions within Cleveland, for which the Browns generate $30 million in annual revenue.

 

If the Haslams, who have a net worth somewhere in the range of $8 billion to $10 billion, were as civic-minded as they want everyone to believe, they’d find a solution in Cleveland. Think of it this way: If you suddenly got your hands on $8 billion and the Cleveland Browns, you’d build a stadium on the site of the big Post Office site Downtown, invest in a lakefront development and die with the love of a city and future generations of Dawg Pounders. And you wouldn’t trade for a serial sex offender.

 

...A move to the suburbs has everything to do with the further enrichment of people who have enough money to think they can do anything they want. But as one member of the Cleveland City Council put it, “If the Haslam Sports Group wants to provide a ‘fan experience,’ put a damn winning team on the field.”

^ whoa!!!

Smart move to cut through the grandstanding BS and get this moving via the courts.    Let's get this over with one way or the other and I'm curious to see if the city truly throws good money after bad trying to litigate this.

Edited October 24, 2024Oct 24 by goozer

I truly want The Haslam Group to explain exactly what the  Brook Park location will deliver on it's promises.  So far they taught a Super Bowl and large stadium concerts. Both of these are rare occurrences.  All other events they speak of are poaching from existing venues and out of Cleveland.  None of this is more than greed and please stop stating this benefits the majority of Clevelander's when I am sure many will be unable to afford tickets and price gouging they will ask us.

 

Lastly, the shelf life a new stadiums aren't as long as one thinks they are. The NFL and their owners always are complaining they want the newest, best venues that cities now cannot afford.  What happens when the Brook Park stadium is obsolete in the next 30 year cycle?

4 minutes ago, goozer said:

Smart move to cut through the grandstanding BS and get this moving via the courts.    Let's get this over with one way or the other and I'm curious to see if the city truly throws good money after bad trying to litigate this.

if one is to believe the Browns games generate $30M in revenue annually then its wise to pursue legal action. 

 

3 minutes ago, surfohio said:

if one is to believe the Browns games generate $30M in revenue annually then its wise to pursue legal action. 

 

Two things.   If you believe you have a chance to win, sure litigate.   I for one, don't think they have a chance in you know where to prevail, but now we'll find out.  Second, develop the lakefront properly with the right public support, leadership and foresight and you'll generate more revenue/property value/public access that will make the Browns move to Brook Park pale in comparison. 

 

Problem is this is Cleveland and even the best real estate in the state of Ohio can't be developed properly, or at all, over multiple generations.   City and county leadership continuing to have no ability to drive development and failing to get out of its own way.