Kroenk Plays the 'Victim' Card

[rams2050]

Puh-leeze! What a TOTAL loser!

Q: How do you feel about leaving St. Louis?

Kroenke: It truly is bittersweet. I grew up in Missouri, and there’s a lot of wonderful people in St. Louis and Missouri. I’ll always feel that way about Missouri. I never dreamed I’d be put in this position. But at the same time, you’re not going to sit there and be a victim.


http://www.stltoday.com/sports/football/article_dac6eab5-b41d-57f2-9497-a21cd94fa4b5.html​

 

[Young Ram]

I get the hate for Kronke but to be fair to him he was being blamed by the fans and media when it was the CVC that didn't honor their lease agreement. The Task Force offered a mid level stadium that Kronke wouldn't own and he had to, to say it in his words, 'donate' 700 million + to the project. He saw the exact same scenario when the Rams first moved to STL. The stadium would be built and within 15-20 years it would be a low tier stadium once again. You don't become a billionaire sitting on your ass so he saw a once in a lifetime opportunity in Los Angeles and he took it.

 

[fancents86]

So why not build his "masterpiece" in STL? I understand LA's economy is better and is more "glamorous" of a city, but if you truly love your city, you will help it. That stadium in stl could have helped the economy and made a name for football there.

 

[CoachO]

I get the hate for Kronke but to be fair to him he was being blamed by the fans and media when it was the CVC that didn't honor their lease agreement. The Task Force offered a mid level stadium that Kronke wouldn't own and he had to, to say it in his words, 'donate' 700 million + to the project. He saw the exact same scenario when the Rams first moved to STL. The stadium would be built and within 15-20 years it would be a low tier stadium once again. You don't become a billionaire sitting on your ass so he saw a once in a lifetime opportunity in Los Angeles and he took it.

With all due respect, do you think that $700M was by accident? It was an intentional pie in the sky figure (design) that the Rams knew was never going to be approved or agreed to.

And has been mentioned, even making the assumption for the sake of the conversation, they would have spent that $$$ to keep the lease in effect for only the remaining10 years. And with that being said, the first 2-3 years of that 10 the stadium would have been "closed for repairs".

And the other point that is never talked about is the collateral damage that would have come from the lost convention revenue due to the construction. At the end of the day the "price" of those upgrades would have been at least twice the $700M.

The Rams (Kroenke) made that number so outlandish for the very reason to make sure it wasn't doable. If th CVC was to be blamed for anything, it would have been lowballing their proposal. If they would have come in with a proposal in the $300M range (as opposed to the $160M) it would have been a whole lot harder for the arbitrator to side with the Rams.

You can't tell me this wasn't all part of the grand scheme by Kroenke. As was the case in this latest mess, there was nothing Civic Progress could have done to get the Rams to "negotiate in good faith" and stop this even before the arbitration.

 

[ramsince62]

So why not build his "masterpiece" in STL? I understand LA's economy is better and is more "glamorous" of a city, but if you truly love your city, you will help it. That stadium in stl could have helped the economy and made a name for football there.

It's just business, that stadium"s only a portion of the entire development....it's not personal, it's simply about the $$$$$...

 

[kurtfaulk]

.

He's only the victim of a bad toupee.

.

 

[ramsince62]

With all due respect, do you think that $700M was by accident? It was an intentional pie in the sky figure (design) that the Rams knew was never going to be approved or agreed to.

And has been mentioned, even making the assumption for th sak of the conversation, they would have spent that $$$ to o keep the lease in effect for only the remaining10 years. And with that being said, the first 2-3 years of that 10 the stadium would have been "closed for repairs".

And the other point that is never talked about is the collateral damage that would have come from the lost convention revenue due to the construction. At the end of the day the "price" of those upgraded would have been at least twice the $700M.

The Rams (Kroenke) made that number so outlandish for the very reason to make sure it wasn't doable. If th CVC was to be blamed for anything, it would have been low along their proposal. If they would have come in the th a proposal in the $300M range (as opposed to the $160M) it would have been a whole lot harder for the arbitration to see with the Rams.

You can't tell me this wasn't all part of the grand scheme by Kroenke. As was the case in this latest mess, there was nothing Civic Progress could have done to get the Rams to "negotiate in good faith" and stop this even before the arbitration.

Of course it was, pretext is a fine art. Hadn't he already purchased some property in Inglewood over 3 years ago? Then later, completed the puzzle by picking up Hollywood Park? It appears that Kroenke has been playing chess, while St Louis was playing checkers.

 

[RamFan503]

With all due respect, do you think that $700M was by accident? It was an intentional pie in the sky figure (design) that the Rams knew was never going to be approved or agreed to.

That was the amount he would have to put into the new stadium. Not pie in the sky but what they were requiring of Stan for the new stadium that he would still not own.

All things aside, the contract was that the Rams would not have to pay ANYTHING to keep the stadium in top tier status. Stan is rich beyond virtually anyone's ability to wrap their minds around. But you don't throw $700+ million at a project that you don't own and have it administered by someone you don't control and who defaulted on your last agreement.

 

[Young Ram]

So why not build his "masterpiece" in STL? I understand LA's economy is better and is more "glamorous" of a city, but if you truly love your city, you will help it. That stadium in stl could have helped the economy and made a name for football there.

It was a business decision. simple as that.

 

[Young Ram]

With all due respect, do you think that $700M was by accident? It was an intentional pie in the sky figure (design) that the Rams knew was never going to be approved or agreed to.

And has been mentioned, even making the assumption for the sake of the conversation, they would have spent that $$$ to keep the lease in effect for only the remaining10 years. And with that being said, the first 2-3 years of that 10 the stadium would have been "closed for repairs".

And the other point that is never talked about is the collateral damage that would have come from the lost convention revenue due to the construction. At the end of the day the "price" of those upgrades would have been at least twice the $700M.

The Rams (Kroenke) made that number so outlandish for the very reason to make sure it wasn't doable. If th CVC was to be blamed for anything, it would have been lowballing their proposal. If they would have come in with a proposal in the $300M range (as opposed to the $160M) it would have been a whole lot harder for the arbitrator to side with the Rams.

You can't tell me this wasn't all part of the grand scheme by Kroenke. As was the case in this latest mess, there was nothing Civic Progress could have done to get the Rams to "negotiate in good faith" and stop this even before the arbitration.

The point is that the CVC agreed to keep the stadium in the top level of NFL stadiums and to be paid for ONLY by them. The Rams agreed to move to STL ONLY if these terms were agreed upon. Weather the city would lose revenues because of lost conventions didn't matter.

Would you be willing to commit to a business if that business lied to you and defaulted on their lease agreement? I know I wouldn't.

 

[CoachO]

That was the amount he would have to put into the new stadium. Not pie in the sky but what they were requiring of Stan for the new stadium that he would still not own.

All things aside, the contract was that the Rams would not have to pay ANYTHING to keep the stadium in top tier status. Stan is rich beyond virtually anyone's ability to wrap their minds around. But you don't throw $700+ million at a project that you don't own and have it administered by someone you don't control and who defaulted on your last agreement.

You missed my point. Everyone keeps laying the "blame" at the feet of the CVC for declining that figure. And while I realize it semantics at this point. They didn't default on the lease. They chose to be exercise their rights within the lease to decline the arbiter's decision. The lease was still in effect with the only difference being the year to year clause was triggered. Which is exactly what Kroenke wanted to happen.

So the lease was never defaulted on. That is a huge misconception.

 

[OldSchool]

You missed my point. Everyone keeps laying the "blame" at the feet of the CVC for declining that figure. And while I realize it semantics at this point. They didn't default on the lease. They chose to be exercise their rights within the lease to decline the arbiter's decision. The lease was still in effect with the only difference being the year to year clause was triggered. Which is exactly what Kroenke wanted to happen.

So the lease was never defaulted on. That is a huge misconception.

So what you're saying is the CVC's decisions in not living up to the first tier stipulation in the lease allowed the Rams to get out of the lease and relocate? So it was the CVC's actions(or lack of) that allowed the Rams to relocate? That doesn't make them as responsible as Kroenke for the Rams leaving?

 

[Ballhawk]

The problem is that this has nothing to do with the fans and everything to do with the luxury box owners and corporate sponsors. The NFL no longer cares if the peasants fill their seats as long as the big shots are buying theirs.

 

[CoachO]

So what you're saying is the CVC's decisions in not living up to the first tier stipulation in the lease allowed the Rams to get out of the lease and relocate? So it was the CVC's actions(or lack of) that allowed the Rams to relocate? That doesn't make them as responsible as Kroenke for the Rams leaving?

By the strict letter of the lease of course it does. But don't think for a minute that the "negotiate in good faith" was ever part of this equation. Quite the opposite. And for this POS Kroenke to have the audacity to now claim that HE is the victim is nauseating.

 

[Pancake]

With all due respect, do you think that $700M was by accident? It was an intentional pie in the sky figure (design) that the Rams knew was never going to be approved or agreed to.

And has been mentioned, even making the assumption for the sake of the conversation, they would have spent that $$$ to keep the lease in effect for only the remaining10 years. And with that being said, the first 2-3 years of that 10 the stadium would have been "closed for repairs".

And the other point that is never talked about is the collateral damage that would have come from the lost convention revenue due to the construction. At the end of the day the "price" of those upgrades would have been at least twice the $700M.

The Rams (Kroenke) made that number so outlandish for the very reason to make sure it wasn't doable. If th CVC was to be blamed for anything, it would have been lowballing their proposal. If they would have come in with a proposal in the $300M range (as opposed to the $160M) it would have been a whole lot harder for the arbitrator to side with the Rams.

You can't tell me this wasn't all part of the grand scheme by Kroenke. As was the case in this latest mess, there was nothing Civic Progress could have done to get the Rams to "negotiate in good faith" and stop this even before the arbitration.

What about the pie in the sky deal St. Louis agreed to back in 94'?

Your civic leaders should have been more realistic and honest and done a better job of planning for the inevitable up keep before they agreed to that sweetheart deal. And not been so eager to offer the moon to get a team. But they did agree to keep that stadium at an absurd standard and then they didn't honor it. And they also agreed that if they didn't fulfill the terms. The Rams would have the right to relocate.

I think St. Louis should redirect some of their rage towards those people who got them in this mess in the first place.

 

[OldSchool]

By the strict letter of the lease of course it does. But don't think for a minute that the "negotiate in good faith" was ever part of this equation. Quite the opposite. And for this POS Kroenke to have the audacity to now claim that HE is the victim is nauseating.

I agree he's not a victim but he's playing to the crowd and furthering his agenda. The CVC is responsible for the Rams leaving. They and the political leaders put the clause in the contract in the first place knowing full well they couldn't and likely wouldn't live up to it. They rolled the dice that the Rams wouldn't call them on it. Kroenke is all kinds of a scumbag for the way he handled this and hate on him all you want. But the fact that nobody gives the CVC and the people who created the 1st tier clause and failed to live up to it deserve just as much of the blame as Kroenke does for the Rams going back to LA.

 

[OldSchool]

The problem is that this has nothing to do with the fans and everything to do with the luxury box owners and corporate sponsors. The NFL no longer cares if the peasants fill their seats as long as the big shots are buying theirs.

Wrong, they know that no matter what they do us peasants will fill the seats.

 

[CoachO]

What about the pie in the sky deal St. Louis agreed to back in 94'?

Your civic leaders should have been more realistic and honest and done a better job of planning for the inevitable up keep before they agreed to that sweetheart deal. And not been so eager to offer the moon to get a team. But they did agree to keep that stadium at an absurd standard and then they didn't honor it. And they also agreed that if they didn't fulfill the terms. The Rams would have the right to relocate.

I think St. Louis should redirect some of their rage towards those people who got them in this mess in the first place.

And at what point do you look into the crystal ball and forecast the number of stadiums that were built in the decade after they agreed to that clause?

And let's not forget that they continually tried to get something from the Rams in terms of potential upgrades only to have Georgia agree to waive the clause.

The whole top-tier clause was not an issue UNTIL Georgia died. In fact, the quality of the dome was not an issue until Kroenke took over.

 

[jjab360]

...Extremely poor choice of words to say the least

 

[tempests]

Had the CVC honored that deal it would've been the most one-sided stadium arrangement I ever heard of. The good people of St. Louis would be paying off that debt for generations.

No one's going to rage against them for not signing a nine figure check.