Peter King: The 6 Hours That Will Shape NFL’s Second Century

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

RamBill

Legend
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
8,874
The Six Hours That Will Shape NFL’s Second Century

By Peter King

http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2016/01/19/los-angeles-rams-nfl-ownership-meeting

The owners’ decision to approve the Rams’ move to Los Angeles changed the current course of NFL history. Here’s the inside story of how and why the vote swung in favor of Stan Kroenke. Plus answers to reader email

It’s been a week since the NFL’s biggest post-season upset happened inside a Houston hotel: NFL owners voted to approve the move of the Rams from St. Louis to Los Angeles immediately, while giving the Chargers a one-year option to join the Rams or get a stadium deal done in San Diego.

But the strangest aspect of it is still being debated in some league circles: Six hours after an influential league committee handling the Los Angeles negotiations voted 5-1 to recommend to ownership that the league allow the Chargers and Raiders to move to a site in suburban Carson, the owners rebuked their own committee and voted 30-2 to allow the Rams and owner Stan Kroenke to move to Inglewood, scuttling the Carson site forever and ruining the hopes of two teams looking to Carson for long-term franchise salvation.

Those are the six hours that changed the current course of NFL history. What happened, exactly? How did so many owners who professed their love for San Diego chairman Dean Spanos turn on him—and the committee of heretofore trusted veteran owners—in the matter of one Texas afternoon?

Three answers:

1. A secret ballot, so owners who favored the Inglewood project could turn their backs on Spanos without him being sure who they were.

2. Kroenke’s jillions.

3. History repeating itself, with a rebuke of a powerful owner conjuring memories of another powerful owner slapped down a quarter-century ago by new-guard owners with different ideals.

This is not quite a tale fit for the Coen Brothers and the big screen, but if you like stories detailing the reasons why rich people make the decisions they make, it’s a fun ride.

* *

At 1:30 p.m. on Jan. 12, in the Azalea Ballroom at the Westin Houston-Memorial City, the 32 owners (or owners’ proxies) returned from lunch to hear from the six-man Committee on Los Angeles Opportunities. One of the key members, Carolina owner Jerry Richardson, had already come out strong for Spanos and the Carson project, so it was no real surprise when the full body heard the results: five votes for the Chargers and Raiders to move to Carson, one vote for the Rams only to move to Inglewood, closer to downtown L.A.

There were murmurs in the room, but the committee vote shocked no one. Art Rooney II of the Steelers gave his reasons for the majority—solving the Charger/Raider stadium problems, fixing the California stadium conundrum, helping two tradition-rich California franchises—and Kansas City’s Clark Hunt spoke for the minority. He was the minority.

“I dissented,” Hunt told The MMQB, “because I felt the NFL would be best served by having less realignment. Moving one team would be less disruptive to our fan base. And, also, having just one team in Los Angeles would give the league the best chance to be successful.”

“Clark was artful,” said someone in the room. “But it was clear what he wanted and what he thought was best.”

Right. Hunt wanted just one team in Los Angeles. And that seems most logical. Though it’s become fashionable to say two teams is the best idea and will eventually both build strong fan bases, the NFL would be asking two teams to become instantly loved when the region hasn’t had pro football for 21 years. It might happen. But it’s no lock. Hunt realized that. Privately, several owners applauded his bold stance, because they felt Richardson was trying to ramrod the Carson project through.

One point to make before moving on: During the morning meeting, when the final details of both projects were laid on the table for the owners, two owners not known for their loquacious leadership stood up to give ideas. Seattle’s Paul Allen—an E.F. Hutton type who rarely attends such meetings and more rarely speaks at them—said the owners needed to consider the project more than anything else. And Eagles owner Jeffrey Lurie spoke stridently for Kroenke. Those two men influenced the room, and quite possibly portended what was to happen in the afternoon.

“Carson never had the ‘wow’ factor,” one top club official said. “The Rams’ project did. Sentiment for that project became a tsunami.”

Once the membership heard the 5-1 vote, the next step was voting on the project, with a three-quarters majority (24 votes) being required for one side to win. Commissioner Roger Goodell, who proponents of both projects told The MMQB played each proposal down the middle, nonetheless was about to do something that he knew could tangibly affect the outcome. He’d been asked by “six to eight” owners, a source said, over the previous month about the feasibility of this vote being by secret ballot. “Roger knew we had a serious split in the membership,” the source said. “He knew neither side had the votes to win. But he also felt owners needed to vote their consciences, so proposing the secret ballot was something he felt he had to propose, and it was a no-brainer after several owners asked him to do it.”

Goodell proposed it, and asked for a show of hands. A majority would rule. Asked how many favored a secret ballot, more than 17 raised their hands. (The Los Angeles Times reported the vote was 19-13.)

Why was the secret ballot so significant? The Chargers/Raiders faction felt it had between 18 and 20 votes solid entering the meeting—something the Kroenke side felt was fiction. But there was something about the Rams/Inglewood project that, while inconvenient for those who wanted the Chargers and Raiders stadium issues fixed in one fell swoop, many owners knew was better for the NFL long-term. Instantly, the 298-acre Inglewood site would be the best NFL property in the league … with $2.7-billion worth of buildings and development including a 70,240-seat stadium with translucent cover that would join the regular Super Bowl rotation; an underrated campus for a so-called “NFL West,” including a new building for NFL Network and new home for NFL Media; and a 6,000-seat theater that one day one owner said “we hope will host The Oscars.” Carson was a nice project, but it couldn’t compete with all those bells and whistles.

Ballots were printed and distributed to the 32 owners/proxies in the room. A vote was taken. It has been widely reported that the first vote was 20-12 in favor of the Kroenke/Inglewood project, then 21-11 on the next one. But one source in the room said the vote was actually 21-11 the first time, then 20-12 the second time—inexplicably. Whatever the vote was, one owner said Dean Spanos “was utterly shocked—white as a sheet” at the first vote. And he realized that it would be nearly impossible to overturn the will of the silent but overwhelming majority.

In talking to three owners in the wake of the vote, it became apparent that they were convinced Kroenke’s project, the most ambitious stadium/development project in American sports history (likely to end up costing more than $3 billion by the time it’s fully operational in 2019), was the best thing for the NFL’s second century. (The league’s 100th anniversary is in 2020.) To succeed in Los Angeles requires what one league source said was a complex akin to “L.A. Live on steroids,” referring to the Staples Center complex where the Lakers and Kings play. In other words, NFL-big. Kroenke, with his fortune in the billions, had agreed to put $1 billion into the project—money Charger and Raider owners just didn’t have.

But the vote wasn’t at 24, and there was some discussion about a potential compromise. Owners could vote for Carson. Owners could vote for Inglewood. Or owners could vote for Inglewood plus one other team, as Dallas owner Jerry Jones had suggested. Now Baltimore owner Steve Bisciotti said why not just combine B and C, Inglewood and the extra team. And because it was obvious the ownership felt Spanos and the Chargers deserved first shot, why not make “B” the Rams and Chargers in Inglewood? Bisciotti’s idea was embraced by the league.

So Goodell, trying to form a proposal that could get 24 votes, adjourned with the six-man L.A. committee. They were gone about an hour. During that meeting, each of the three owners rotated through to be apprised of the compromises the leagues and committee were considering. They threw around several ideas and settled on this one: Because it was clear San Diego was the franchise favored over Oakland for relocation, the committee would propose giving the Chargers a one-year option to join the Rams in the Inglewood project; construction would start immediately regardless of whether a second team joined. Then, if the Chargers didn’t exercise their option to join in one year, the option would then belong to the Raiders. In addition, the league would throw in $100 million if the Chargers or Raiders reached agreement in their existing markets to build a new stadium.


Goodell and the committee returned to the room and explained the compromise. The membership knew Inglewood was going to pass muster; it was just a matter of time. And this proposal—which potentially motivated the politicos in San Diego to take another shot with $100 million more from the league as a spur—seemed the fairest to both Spanos and the Rams. The Rams were willing to take a partner in Inglewood, but Kroenke would prefer to go it alone. But if it meant the league would give the project its blessing, it was a deal Kroenke was fine with.

The previous Friday, in New York, Kroenke had agreed to a revenue-split if it turned out he eventually would take on a partner. All along, Spanos did not want to be Kroenke’s tenant—or anyone’s tenant, for that matter. But if Kroenke did a deal to take all the financial risk for potential cost overruns and other financial liability, and motivated a second team with a profitable stick-and-carrot, might that tempt the Chargers? In the end, on Friday, Kroenke agreed to let a second team keep all gameday revenue in and around the stadium. And he told the league he would agree to a formula that gave the second team 18.75 percent of other lucrative deals associated with the new stadium—such as signage and stadium naming rights. When the deal was relayed to owners on Tuesday, one owner exclaimed, “Sign me up! We’ll be the Los Angeles Wolverines!” (Writer's note: The team name is changed, because the owner told the story with the agreement that he not be identified.)

The vote was anticlimactic: 30-2. There was light applause. No owner wanted to show up Spanos. They were clapping, one said, for Kroenke, and for this long ordeal being over.

Kroenke rose. “Thank you for your trust,” he said. “I won’t disappoint you.”

* * *

A few things to know:

• St. Louis is the jilted party here, obviously, losing its team. But the lease signed by St. Louis officials to get the Rams to come was such a team-favored deal that the only way it wasn’t going to end ugly for St. Louis was if the Rams’ owner—Georgia Frontiere first, then Kroenke after she died in 2008—agreed to re-write the terms of the lease. Kroenke wouldn’t do that. Those terms said the locals had to keep the Edward Jones Dome a top-tier stadium, which in NFL parlance is taken to mean “top quartile,” or top eight. That would have meant St. Louis would have had to inject $700 million into the Edward Jones Dome by 2015 to keep up with the Joneses (Jerry, and other owners) throughout the league. St. Louis was never going to do that, and pledged about a quarter of that amount. Kroenke said no. Now, you can nail Kroenke for disingenuous negotiating, for never stridently pleading his case publicly and disappearing and never engaging with the fans or politicians to try to get a deal done. All fair criticisms. Nail him too for being a local guy who never seemed earnestly interested in the Rams staying in St. Louis. But to Kroenke, a deal’s a deal. He wasn’t going to let the locals break a binding lease.

• Jones, according to one top club official who got a call from him urging this team to vote for the Rams’ project, was a major salesman for Kroenke. “Jerry thought Jerry Richardson went overboard trying to push Carson,” the official said. In the end, Jones spent hours pushing Kroenke’s deal, and as another club official said, it had nothing to do with the relationship between Jones and Kroenke. They’re not particularly close. Jones just felt this deal had to be about the owner who had the deepest pockets and the most invested in making Los Angeles work.

• Said one top club official I trust: “Carson never had the ‘wow’ factor. The Rams’ project did. Sentiment for that project became a tsunami.”

• Maybe it won’t matter in the end, but I get no great sentiment favoring the Chargers to move to Los Angeles. If they win, that’ll change. But the Rams were in Los Angeles and Anaheim for 49 years, so there’s a natural sentiment to be loyal to them when they return. Spanos is likely loathe to return to San Diego because of years failing to make a deal there, and it makes sense to move to a place that is going to take away every financial woe. But San Diego is such a loyal and vibrant market, it’s the only place in southern California that loves the Chargers. Could the $100 million spur by the league be the impetus to get a deal done with the city on a new stadium? So many in the league hope so.

• Now for the allegory 25 years in the making …

Once upon a time in the NFL, the establishment told the new kids what was best for everyone, and the kids rebelled. This was in the early nineties, when the league, in the midst of a multi-billion-dollar network TV deal (four years, $3.6 billion), proposed to rebate its TV partners because they were taking a financial bath. Some new-guard owners, including Jerry Jones, nixed it. The new guard worked to get nine votes so they could block the give-back. And they found nine owners, and there was no give-back. Old guard leader Art Modell, the Browns owner and chairman of the Broadcast Committee and the biggest advocate of relief for the networks, subsequently resigned his prestigious TV post.

In 2016, Richardson pushed hard for Carson, and thought he had a majority of owners supporting the Chargers/Raiders project. But when the secret ballot came, it was clear the majority was for the project, not for Spanos. “Classic case of Jerry [Richardson] misreading the field, of overplaying his hand,” one owner said. Richardson, essentially, became the Modell of 2016. He’s still a well-respected owner, but he’s not the power broker some thought when the Los Angeles process started.

A few days after the Rams got their deal, one longtime team and league official mulled the meaning of what just happened. He said: “I sense a shift in the geological plate of the NFL.” A few people were reaching for that conclusion in the wake of a Richie Rich owner getting his way, and the new breed celebrating the shiny new football palace set to open in America’s second-largest city in 2019.

I get it, but I’m not so sure. A shift toward the new breed is exactly what people said in the early nineties, when the owners pushed out Modell and ushered in the new TV model (in favor of FOX using the NFL to build a prime-time network, which has worked).

The NFL isn’t changing so much. It already has changed.
 

Merlin

Enjoying the ride
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
May 8, 2014
Messages
37,034
The NFL left Los Angeles for one reason: stadium quality. The NFL was out of Los Angeles for 20 years for one reason: stadium quality. Kroenke's win and the Rams' return was assured for one reason: stadium quality. That is really the gist of the whole thing, and no amount of BS back room politicking by Spanos was going to change it. Dude is seriously stupid for a millionaire owner, seriously.

And I'll go one step further... He's a fool for trying to take LA. LA has never belonged to him in spite of all that time with no team there. There are still more Rams fans there by far than Chargers fans. There are also more Raiders fans. Spanos is gonna F everything up if he signs on with Stan in LA before he gets that vote in San Diego. He is out of his effin mind.
 

Ramfansince79

Rookie
Joined
Jan 14, 2016
Messages
356
Name
Ramsfan79
The NFL left Los Angeles for one reason: stadium quality. The NFL was out of Los Angeles for 20 years for one reason: stadium quality. Kroenke's win and the Rams' return was assured for one reason: stadium quality. That is really the gist of the whole thing, and no amount of BS back room politicking by Spanos was going to change it. Dude is seriously stupid for a millionaire owner, seriously.

And I'll go one step further... He's a fool for trying to take LA. LA has never belonged to him in spite of all that time with no team there. There are still more Rams fans there by far than Chargers fans. There are also more Raiders fans. Spanos is gonna F everything up if he signs on with Stan in LA before he gets that vote in San Diego. He is out of his effin mind.
I seriously hope this is all a ruse to get him a new stadium in San Diego. Nobody wants the Chargers to move.
 

thirteen28

I like pizza.
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
8,324
Name
Erik
The NFL left Los Angeles for one reason: stadium quality. The NFL was out of Los Angeles for 20 years for one reason: stadium quality. Kroenke's win and the Rams' return was assured for one reason: stadium quality. That is really the gist of the whole thing, and no amount of BS back room politicking by Spanos was going to change it. Dude is seriously stupid for a millionaire owner, seriously.

And I'll go one step further... He's a fool for trying to take LA. LA has never belonged to him in spite of all that time with no team there. There are still more Rams fans there by far than Chargers fans. There are also more Raiders fans. Spanos is gonna F everything up if he signs on with Stan in LA before he gets that vote in San Diego. He is out of his effin mind.

Even though things didn't turn out the way I'd hoped, now that it's all said and done I really hope the Rams end up as the only team in LA. Spanos should take his $100 mil, the $550 mil he'd have to pay for relocation, and if it's available, the $200 mil loan he can get from the NFL for a new stadium and throw that into a new building in SD. With that much put into the pot, it would probably be a lot easier to get the rest of it.

Mark Davis should just cash out and sell the team to Larry Ellison of Oracle, who probably has enough change in his couch to buy the team. The Raiders are never going to get a good deal from the league as long as the name 'Davis' is associated with their ownership. On the other hand, Ellison could afford to construct his own bling building in Oakland and the locals - and the NFL - would love him for it.
 

Pancake

Hall of Fame
Joined
Aug 1, 2010
Messages
2,204
Name
Ernie
Plus the NFL must have realized that SK would probably sue the fuck out of them because of that crooked "committee". What a sham that was.
 

DaveFan'51

Old-Timer
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Apr 18, 2014
Messages
18,666
Name
Dave
I've said it before and I'll say it again! A SHARED STADIUM IS A BAD IDEA, AND I FOR ONE DON'T LIKE IT!!!
 

RamBill

Legend
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
8,874
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #7
Bob Costas: St.Louis Never Had A Chance in Keeping the Rams

Bob Costas on the baseball HOF, the dangers of football and why the Rams belong in LA. He talks with Randy Karraker and D’Marco Farr.

Listen to Costas Interview

Rams Discussion Starts at 7:30
 

Merlin

Enjoying the ride
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
May 8, 2014
Messages
37,034
Even though things didn't turn out the way I'd hoped, now that it's all said and done I really hope the Rams end up as the only team in LA. Spanos should take his $100 mil, the $550 mil he'd have to pay for relocation, and if it's available, the $200 mil loan he can get from the NFL for a new stadium and throw that into a new building in SD. With that much put into the pot, it would probably be a lot easier to get the rest of it.

Mark Davis should just cash out and sell the team to Larry Ellison of Oracle, who probably has enough change in his couch to buy the team. The Raiders are never going to get a good deal from the league as long as the name 'Davis' is associated with their ownership. On the other hand, Ellison could afford to construct his own bling building in Oakland and the locals - and the NFL - would love him for it.

Agreed man. Problem is if the Chargers pass on LA the Raiders will swoop in. Stan foresaw this and that is why he designed a 2 team stadium from day one with all the bells and whistles for each organization. If by some miracle it remains open, then LA will remain a threat to all other cities as leverage for stadiums, too, and that needs to stop. And I am also tired of seeing the Davis family running the Raiders into the ground. Bringing in more billionaire owners and highly successful businessmen is good for the league, vice the rich families that want to live off of the team earnings like the Davis and Spanos clans. Guys like Ellison are ideal, no doubt about it.

Anyway, my take on all this is that I think the NFL is going to change over the next 20 years in terms of how they build stadiums and it will be due to Stan's efforts in LA. A team building a stadium is going to be more of a partnering thing where the stadium is placed in the middle of reinvigoration projects in downtown districts. This makes it more logical as a good investment by the city, where they will then see the surrounding area take root with new investment money and developer interest. If done right there doesn't need to be an over the top stadium, but a stadium placed shrewdly with supporting infrastructure around it that allows for the reinvigoration efforts. The Inglewood project is going to be that successful, that it is going to shape future league policy.
 

thirteen28

I like pizza.
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
8,324
Name
Erik
Agreed man. Problem is if the Chargers pass on LA the Raiders will swoop in. Stan foresaw this and that is why he designed a 2 team stadium from day one with all the bells and whistles for each organization. If by some miracle it remains open, then LA will remain a threat to all other cities as leverage for stadiums, too, and that needs to stop. And I am also tired of seeing the Davis family running the Raiders into the ground. Bringing in more billionaire owners and highly successful businessmen is good for the league, vice the rich families that want to live off of the team earnings like the Davis and Spanos clans. Guys like Ellison are ideal, no doubt about it.

I really hope Stan drives a hard bargain. Despite the size of LA, I really think they are only a one-team town. That being said, the Raiders are a more natural fit in LA since they have some history there, and there would be a natural inter-conference rivalry there. Maybe they could have a preseason game every year to replace the Governor's Cup, call it the Mayor's Cup or something like that.

The owner of whatever team moves in as a second team to Inglewood is going to have to know that they are always going to be Kroenke's bitch.

As far as Davis/Spanos type owners, I think it is going to be increasingly hard for those types to get public funding for their stadiums, especially after the amount of public funding in St. Louis the NFL walked away from (although I may have to eat my words if San Diego comes up with something in the reprieve they've gotten). In general, I think more and more, teams that want a new building are going to have to finance it mostly or completely by themselves, which is why someone like Ellison (3rd in net worth on the Forbes 400, nearly 3 times that of Paul Allen and almost 5 times that of Kroenke) should probably be owners instead of the Davis/Spanos types that use their teams as their primary source of wealth generation. In the case of the latter two, if they are going to own teams then they should probably just accept that they are going to have to play in a lower-tier NFL stadium. They'll still make money, but not enough to get the bling building that someone like Stan can get. However, at the end of the day, if they put a good product on the field, most fans won't care about the stadium ... and on the flip side, if their team is perennially crap, the bests stadium in the world won't save you.
 

Elmgrovegnome

Legend
Joined
Jan 23, 2013
Messages
21,603
One team in L.A. is definitely best. Returning to that old market and trying to split it just weakens the cause.
 

RamBill

Legend
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
8,874
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #11
Inside The Owners Meetings: How And Why The Rams Were REALLY Able To Move To L.A.

By David Rosenthal, CBS Los Angeles

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2016...why-the-rams-were-really-able-to-move-to-l-a/

LOS ANGELES (CBSLA.com) — Just hours before the NFL owners voted 30-2 to let the Rams and Stan Kroenke move to Inglewood, an “influential league committee” of owners handling the Los Angeles negotiations voted 5-1 in favor of the Carson project.

The six-man committee included Panthers owner Jerry Richardson, who supported Chargers owner Dean Spanos and backed the Carson project vehemently.

The committee was chaired by Pittsburgh Steelers owner Art Rooney II and included New England’s Robert Kraft, Carolina’s Richardson, Kansas City’s Clark Hunt, Houston’s Bob McNair and the New York Giants’ John Mara.

Rooney also sided with the Carson project, while the lone dissenter of the six-man committee, Chiefs owner Clark Hunt, said he felt the NFL “would be best served by having less realignment.”

Several owners quietly supported Hunt’s dissent and that showed when they would vote 30-2 in favor of the Inglewood project.

“Carson never had the ‘wow’ factor,” one top executive told Sports Illustrated’s Peter King.

“The Rams project did, and sentiment for that project became a tsunami,” he added.

Once the owners heard the results of the committee’s 5-1 vote, it was their turn to vote.

For any proposal to pass, a three-quarters majority, 24 votes, was required.

Here’s where things got interesting.

According to King, Goodell was approached by six to eight owners who were in favor of a “secret ballot” for the vote.

“[Goodell] knew neither side had the votes to win, but he also felt owners needed to vote their consciences, so proposing the secret ballot was something he felt he had to propose,” one source told King.

Goodell proposed the secret ballot to the owners, needing a majority for it to pass.

When 17 owners raised their hands, and the secret ballot was instituted.

According to King, “There was something about the Rams/Inglewood project, while inconvenient for those who wanted the Chargers and Raiders stadium issues fixed in one fell swoop, many owners knew it was better for the NFL long-term.”

Think about it, the Inglewood stadium will put the Dallas Cowboys stadium to shame.

Construction of the stadium and the surrounding areas could reach over $3 billion.

The surrounding areas will have many office and media buildings, which the NFL and NFL Network plan to use.

The stadium itself will be a fine addition to the Super Bowl rotation, as well as providing a main base for “NFL West,” as King describes it.

Also accompanying the stadium is a 6,000-seat theater, with a similar atmosphere to that of L.A. Live.

The first vote (remember, a three-quarters majority is needed to pass) came out either 21-11 or 20-12, depending on what sources you ask, in favor of the Inglewood project.

The vote absolutely blindsided Chargers owner Dean Spanos, who was reportedly “Utterly shocked — white as a sheet.”

It became apparent that Kroenke’s Inglewood project, with all of its bells and whistles, was most preferred by the owners, who were using a secret ballot to cast their true opinions.

Kroenke’s commitment to throw billions into the project was something the Chargers and Raiders weren’t willing to do.

Since no three-quarters majority was reached on the first vote, Ravens owner Steve Bisciotti suggested a compromise.

Bisciotti suggested giving the owners the option to vote for “Inglewood plus one other team” as well as just the Carson and Inglewood projects.

This kept the door open for the Chargers and possibly the Raiders to move to Los Angeles, appealing to the concerns of many of those who dissented in the first vote.

The six-man committee and Goodell decided the Inglewood project, while also giving the Chargers a one-year option to join the Rams in Inglewood, was the best possible solution for bringing back an NFL team (or two) to Los Angeles.

If the Chargers do not exercise that option, then the Raiders have one year to decide whether or not to join the Rams in Inglewood.

Also, the NFL agreed to give the Chargers and Raiders both $100 million if they could reach new stadium deals in their existing markets.

Kroenke reportedly wanted to have the Inglewood stadium to himself, but if allowing a team to join him meant having the league’s blessing for the project, Kroenke was all for it.

The Rams owner also agreed to a revenue split if a team does join him in Inglewood, which would allow the second team to keep all game-day revenue in and around the stadium.

He also agreed that the second team would receive 18.75 percent of all other “lucrative deals associated with the new stadium — such as signage and stadium naming rights.”

This time, the vote passed by an overwhelming majority: 30-2.

Cowboys owner Jerry Jones was allegedly a major supporter of Kroenke’s Inglewood project.

Jones wanted to the deal to be about the owner who had the deepest pockets and the most commitment to making NFL in LA work.

Spanos now faces a difficult decision: to rid himself of all financial worry and move to Los Angeles, or to improve the stadium in San Diego and keep the team there.

David Rosenthal is a web producer for CBS Los Angeles. David lives in Los Angeles and is a Dodgers, Kings, Lakers, and Rams fan. If you have any questions or comments for him, he can be reached at drosenthal@cbs.com.