New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[RamFan503]

Oh - one other thing. Even though the stadium may indeed be privately owned, they have found loopholes that allow them to call it public because it is generally open to the public. Again - sketchy but....

 

[RamFan503]

yes, when he feels like it, he has done more than his share of deals without having KD there, do you not think this is an issue that just maybe he should voice his opinions on by himself? this decision affects millions of people yet he has an underling do his talking?

In virtually all of his deals, Stan has others doing the negotiating for him. I understand why people may not view it as a personal connection that way but I'm not sure it matters in the grand scheme of things.

 

[RamFan503]

do you see anything that says Spanos has refused to take the governors calls? i havent?

Well, he hasn't been dealing with the Governor. I will tell you however, Georgia declined to meet with Governor Wilson when he was appealing to her not to move from CA.

 

[RamFan503]

i must be, but really, if you were a St Louisan wouldnt you want to hear that the owner is at least taking calls? i understand that KD is listening, but to hear your governor, the task force and anyone involved in St Louis plan say they have tried and Stan wont answer thier calls, leaves a really bad taste in alot of mouths. so no i for one am not satisfied that KD is the only one we have to deal with.

And I don't blame you for feeling that way one bit. I don't live anywhere near either market so I don't have the emotional connection that I expect from the fans in LA and St Louis.

 

[OldSchool]

do you see anything that says Spanos has refused to take the governors calls? i havent?

And here I thought it was Peacock running the stadium show not the Govenor. It is funny though the Govenor appointed Peacock to do the dirty work for him and you're ok with it. Kroenke appoints Demhoff to do his and it's not ok.

 

[WillasDad]

And here I thought it was Peacock running the stadium show not the Govenor. It is funny though the Govenor appointed Peacock to do the dirty work for him and you're ok with it. Kroenke appoints Demhoff to do his and it's not ok.

Some people just feel better speaking to the supervisor...*shrugs*

 

[OldSchool]

 

[tonyl711]

And here I thought it was Peacock running the stadium show not the Govenor. It is funny though the Govenor appointed Peacock to do the dirty work for him and you're ok with it. Kroenke appoints Demhoff to do his and it's not ok.

keep trying, the govenor is not the point man and you know it, you know what im saying and dont want to admit it, tell me if you were from St Louis you would be happy that Stan wont talk to anyone, thinks his minnions should do, you know you wouldnt like it.

 

[The Ripper]

I wouldn't argue that they should have necessarily been planning out a new stadium but should have likely been planning out how to honestly deal with the top tier issue as they knew it was there and that shoe would eventually drop.


Again, the condition has been there for remaining in the Dome lease. It was a bad idea from the get go but the elephant has always been in the room.


I really don't give Georgia this kind of latitude. If nothing, she was all about sucking as much money from the team as possible and keep in mind that she originally had Baltimore in her sights until Shaw - being on the NFL stadium committee - brought the St Louis dilemma to her knowing how desperate they were to get a team in the dome.


I would definitely agree with this. If someone is bashing plans in public, how does the public get behind it? Sorry but Fabiani appears to be intentionally poisoning the water whereas Demoff at minimum is offering suggestions on the proposal at hand without undermining it with the public.


I kinda think we do but even if this is true, we don't know that Fabiani is helping in SD either.


The Rams may have been indeed forced but through that, we know Demoff has offered suggestions (undoubtedly from Stan) and some of those suggestions have been incorporated. What we do know is that he hasn't publicly discredited what the task force is doing.


Again, I have to follow this logic. Publicly dismissing the proposal in SD and openly criticizing those involved like Fabiani has been doing can't help in getting the public behind a proposal to use tax dollars toward a new stadium.


You are assuming that Demoff has no say or is not echoing his boss' edicts yet Fabiani is. I don't see how that would possibly be the case - at least with Demoff.


My take is that the city should have at minimum had an end goal in mind here. Not necessarily for a new stadium but just what they were going to do throughout the process. I don't know that there is a good answer here because the lease was so damned one sided toward the Rams. It sucks.


What bankrupts the owner? The Chargers are supposedly being paid to play in SD.


That is not what most evaluations indicate but I do agree with this. There are many financial reasons a team playing in a city impacts the tax base through economic activity and the like.


And Carson isn't? Really?


Not to beat a dead horse but isn't that exactly what the CVC did with their proposal to the arbitrators?


And yet Demoff IS giving the task force in St Louis input on the Riverfront stadium. Doesn't that indicate a potential willingness to play in the new stadium in St Louis? Is it possible that staying is still in their future plans?


I thought all indications and Fabiani himself said that they had been meeting with the mayor.


There are several flaws here. The PSLs are supposed to be $120 million (still seems low); the $600 million is not taking into account what we already know will about to $200 million not coming out of the owner's pockets but $50 million that would; the Riverfront stadium would not be able to host NCAA tourneys either and Stan wouldn't get one dime from any held in the dome and the seating for the Riverfront stadium is less.

Again, it is really difficult to compare apples to apples on any of the financing proposals over the past 10 years or more.


How so? Specifically. And are we talking their current stadium or what they have offered to spend? I don't recall anything saying what they are willing to spend.


Seems like a pretty fair article.

Yeah - not sure how that passes muster if that is actually the case. The team is apparently giving some input but how much is debatable.


This is what I have read. Again, I don't have any way of knowing how active the Rams have been in this process. We know Stan hasn't been directly involved but what that means or how it is viewed by the NFL is unknown.


This may not be too far from what actually happens. In fact, Kroenke may be still working toward this end. It may seem far fetched but Kroenke could still be even building a stadium with plans to sell it to either another team(s) or the NFL itself. Then he turns around and secures the Riverfront property for himself and builds what he actually wants in his native lands. Can anyone actually say that the city wouldn't be able to secure the land and then sell it to Stan at a very owner friendly price.


OK - this is pretty funny. Thanks for that.


Just another great article by Shane.

How did half of the quotes use me as the source. None them are mine. I started reading and then started looking through my posts. Then began to laugh which is good because the kids are driving me nuts tonight

 

[rhinobean]

Listened to Karreker this afternoon on 101 and his main issue with losing the team/NFL is that it would permanently lower the city to second class and that there would be an exodus of big business from the area! I have to believe he's right! As a life long St. Louisan, I'd hate to see that be the end result of Kroenke moving the team to LA!

 

[drasconis]

The NFL must approve all team leases and they have done that at least twice so if the NFL had an issue with it they would have had the Rams remove it.

Irrelevent to their rules...so why have it removed? I realize the Rams may argue that was the negotiation required...the question is how does the NFL feel about that, how the CVC or the city feel is also irrelevent...

 

[drasconis]

One thing to keep in mind when asking these questions is that bylaws and their interpretations can be amended and open for debate. Have the Rams met the requirement for the relocation bylaws? Will the owners change the bylaws to fit the situation? I wouldn't get so attached to the relocation bylaws, or any of the NFL's bylaws to be honest.

Fully agree, in all likelyhood regardless of outcome something is likely to give in their rules...

 

[RamFan503]

How did half of the quotes use me as the source. None them are mine. I started reading and then started looking through my posts. Then began to laugh which is good because the kids are driving me nuts tonight

Ha! It just does that cuz u posted the article. I wasn't about to go in and put your source in front of each one.

 

[RamFan503]

Listened to Karreker this afternoon on 101 and his main issue with losing the team/NFL is that it would permanently lower the city to second class and that there would be an exodus of big business from the area! I have to believe he's right! As a life long St. Louisan, I'd hate to see that be the end result of Kroenke moving the team to LA!

No doubt. That would suck. Not sure he's right about that though.

 

[rhinobean]

No doubt. That would suck. Not sure he's right about that though.

Hope we don't find out!

 

[RamFan503]

keep trying, the govenor is not the point man and you know it, you know what im saying and dont want to admit it, tell me if you were from St Louis you would be happy that Stan wont talk to anyone, thinks his minnions should do, you know you wouldnt like it.

While I don't think I'd like it much, I don't know how much it will actually come into play in any kind of decision, nor should it.

 

[RamFan503]

Hope we don't find out!

I have to agree with you there. As much as I can see both sides, I don't want my Rams moving yet again. But that's mostly for the fans in the Lou and that I'm tired of teams moving to chase the latest and greatest - especially my Rams.

 

[The Ripper]

Irrelevent to their rules...so why have it removed? I realize the Rams may argue that was the negotiation required...the question is how does the NFL feel about that, how the CVC or the city feel is also irrelevent...

They approved the lease with the right to relocate in there so it's not irrelevant. It was known what happens when the lease went year to year from the beginning by the NFL, the Rams and the CVC.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Listened to Karreker this afternoon on 101 and his main issue with losing the team/NFL is that it would permanently lower the city to second class and that there would be an exodus of big business from the area! I have to believe he's right! As a life long St. Louisan, I'd hate to see that be the end result of Kroenke moving the team to LA!

Aren't there already businesses leaving? I thought Busch was moving and a few others as well... I figure it'd probably be related more to politics than a football team... As long as the Cards are there I can't see how anyone could say that St Louis is a second class city, but maybe I'm biased.

 

[OldSchool]

keep trying, the govenor is not the point man and you know it, you know what im saying and dont want to admit it, tell me if you were from St Louis you would be happy that Stan wont talk to anyone, thinks his minnions should do, you know you wouldnt like it.

And one simple fact keeps going over your head and you fail to understand it. Kroenke is not the point man either he has assigned those duties to Demoff.