New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[RamFan503]

Good stuff @Goose Thanks for posting these.

 

[rhinobean]

I was pleased to read what Andy Banker had to say re: Peacock and his passion for the city and the Rams! I hope that buying tickets and going to the games is enough for Kroenke to be okay with keeping the team here! Lots of bucks on the line for him and his team!

 

[RamFan503]

"The NFL would like to have an NFL franchise back in Los Angeles, but the Rams are not the team they want to relocate to Los Angeles. "

I would like to know where this information came from, because up to this point the NFL has said that Stan has been doing everything according to procedure in terms of Stadium planning and relocation.

Yeah - I don't put too much credence in statements like that.

 

[RamFan503]

I was pleased to read what Andy Banker had to say re: Peacock and his passion for the city and the Rams! I hope that buying tickets and going to the games is enough for Kroenke to be okay with keeping the team here! Lots of bucks on the line for him and his team!

It seems to me that he is also saying that he thinks Stan wants to stay anyway. It has been my contention all along. I get the Inglewood thing and all but if he was dead set on moving to LA, I don't think he would stay silent, instead he would drum up the excitement in the LA market.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Yeah - I don't put too much credence in statements like that.

I like how it went from"NFL may sweeten the pot to make him stay" which seems like an idea that a media member just floated, to "NFL will sweeten the pot" like someone from the NFL came out and said that.

It seems to me that he is also saying that he thinks Stan wants to stay anyway. It has been my contention all along. I get the Inglewood thing and all but if he was dead set on moving to LA, I don't think he would stay silent, instead he would drum up the excitement in the LA market.

I saw a bunch of things from the LA times somewhat dismissing the Carson plan though, some economist said that the franchises are worth more in separate markets than they are sharing a stadium like they are, and they were saying that the numbers for the stadium don't really add up, mainly the fact that they require the G4 loan, which apparently doesn't apply to teams that relocate, as well as even so they are short even with their highest projections. Also aparently it'll cost about 200,000-300,000 per month to operate some gas wells system because it's being built on a former landfill had a bunch of toxic shit seep into the ground, they also have to put some giant plastic thing to keep the toxic gas from seeping into the air.


It's still theory still, but it seems that they're under the impression the Kroenke plan is more viable and real than the Davis/Spanos one. Not that it means that much, but it's interesting.

 

[ChrisW]

mainly the fact that they require the G4 loan, which apparently doesn't apply to teams that relocate, as well as even so they are short even with their highest projections.

This matters as much as the other bylaws as it's voted on by the owners. So if Stan can break all the other bylaws and move when he wants, then certainly the owners can vote on who to give the loan to.

 

[Big Unit]

I'd never seen the Andy Banker comments before; thank you for that!

And his comments about Stan Kroenke being instrumental in helping the Rams move FROM LA TO St. Louis are correct, too. Given all the public relations problems the NFL has had this year, I don't see how they can ignore that, while at the same time doing nothing to resolve the problems of the Raiders and the Chargers.

I sure hope Missouri supports whatever funding is required for the new stadium; it's a perfect fit for the "city/arch/river" downtown redevelopment plan for St. Louis. They're redoing the museum under the Arch for the first time in 40+ years; putting green space over the Interstates that now divide downtown from the Arch grounds and the riverfront; and the new Stan Musial Bridge is part of the skyline; second only to the Arch. The ONLY truly blighted area of the riverfront, from the Brewery in the south, to Busch Stadium, to the Arch grounds, to Laclede's Landing, to Lumiere Place and the Four Seasons Hotel, to the "Stan Span" - is the proposed site for the new stadium. It's a perfect fit.

Missouri has little stomach for helping out St. Louis, I know. Sure hope they can figure out a way to get stadium financing done.

 

[bluecoconuts]

This matters as much as the other bylaws as it's voted on by the owners. So if Stan can break all the other bylaws and move when he wants, then certainly the owners can vote on who to give the loan to.

Ehhhh, I wouldn't say that... While Stan can break moving bylaws and then sue for anti-trust violations if they attempted to punish or block him, those two couldn't break G4 bylaws and just take the money, it would require a vote and getting passed. Granted they could probably just vote to give them the money anyway, or change the bylaws to allow relocation as well (but the NFL may not want to set that type of precedent), but I don't think you could sue for the money if they said no.

Now if that comes up and is voted on during the owners meeting (and passed) I'd say that indicates the NFL really wants the Carson project to go through (unless it's one very elaborate bluff, which would be a bit much), likewise if they sit down all three guys and have them come up with a plan (which you have to think is likely), and then announce discussions (not as likely) that would also indicate strongly how they feel. I'm still under the impression that only Kroenke can determine where the Rams play in 2016, the Carson project and pressure from the NFL could sway him to change his mind (again, assuming it's not just one big bluff, which if that's the case it's not really working anyway), but if it doesn't and he pushes forward with a stadium, you gotta think Spanos or Davis pull out. They're not going to split LA 3 ways.

 

[Rabid Ram]

Hmm maybe the LA leverage card is being used by silent Stan to help fellow owners get into LA in a way they have been previously denied.

 

[BuiltRamTough]

The Chargers are bluffing. If San Diego comes up with a stadium solution then what?

 

[RamFan503]

Hmm maybe the LA leverage card is being used by silent Stan to help fellow owners get into LA in a way they have been previously denied.

I think there is a strong possibility OR that he is helping them get deals in their own markets.

I think it is interesting that he still uses the same Missouri home he has owned for something like 40 years as his primary residence and his kids attended public schools in Missouri. He has a lot of ties to Missouri and until he starts packing up the team, I will believe that he intends to stay in St Louis.

I read something else that was interesting about the soccer facility he built in Colorado. It included 24 first class youth soccer fields as part of the project. He got tax subsidies for building the infrastructure but built the rest on his company's dime as he was also building shopping centers and housing as part of the project. I'm not saying it was all selfless but he was under no requirement to provide the largest youth soccer facility in the country.

The biggest fear that I think St Louis should have is that Stan tends to like to think very big and control the projects he is involved in. He apparently gets VERY involved in the details of everything about a project once he decides to do it. He may not like the idea of having others in control of such a big piece of the future of the Rams.

 

[bluecoconuts]

The Chargers are bluffing. If San Diego comes up with a stadium solution then what?

I believe San Diego requires 2/3rds voter approval for anything like that, so unless they find something that doesn't use taxes and thus doesn't need the voters, it'll be very unlikely. I think of the three teams, San Diego is the most likely to move. The question becomes do they split with Davis or piggyback with Kroenke? That likely depends on if Kroenke can be convinced to stay/ or is bluffing.

Either way, I don't think they can afford the stadium they made in the video. Another maybe, but that one I doubt.

 

[Goose]

I was pleased to read what Andy Banker had to say re: Peacock and his passion for the city and the Rams! I hope that buying tickets and going to the games is enough for Kroenke to be okay with keeping the team here! Lots of bucks on the line for him and his team!

If our politicians had the same passion and drive for the City as Dave does imagine where this city would be. Politicians however are looking for a career that extend past the city and the state more times than not and won't do anything to put themselves in jeopardy.

 

[Goose]

It seems to me that he is also saying that he thinks Stan wants to stay anyway. It has been my contention all along. I get the Inglewood thing and all but if he was dead set on moving to LA, I don't think he would stay silent, instead he would drum up the excitement in the LA market.

Stan stepped up in a big way to help bring football here twice. Once when financing to bring the expansion team here fell through and then again to help bring the Rams here. Stan felt disrespected by City officials. I have been told on several occasions that if the City had approached Stan early on and worked with him thing would be very different; some on the mayors staff felt it was more important to prove they were the smartest person in the room. The problem is sometimes you're not and here we are. I don't think Stan had a desire to leave STL until they low-balled him, then everything changed. Peacock is working hard to rebuild the bridges that have been burnt. Time will only tell if he is able to succeed.

 

[Goose]

The Chargers are bluffing. If San Diego comes up with a stadium solution then what?

No one is bluffing here. Everyone has a winning hand. One way or another all three teams will more than likely end up with a new stadium.

 

[Prime Time]

From this morning's Peter King - MMQB -

http://mmqb.si.com/2015/02/23/tampa-bay-buccaneers-jameis-winston-peter-king-nfl-combine-draft/2/

On Los Angeles and potential division realignment.

The announcement that the Raiders and Chargers have bonded to fact-find about a new stadium project in the Los Angeles suburb of Carson is odd enough. But it is driven by the fact that there is a very dangerous game of musical chairs playing in L.A. right now. Three teams for two spots, max. And because the independently wealthy owner of the Rams, Stan Kroenke, already has his own stadium planned in nearby Inglewood, there was pressure on the Chargers and the Raiders to get in the L.A. game, and get in fast.

We’re only two minutes into a 60-minute football game right now, so nothing should be taken as life or death yet. But maybe this is the spur that San Diego needed to convince its electorate that the Chargers really might move. The city task force’s announcement Sunday that it would make its decision on whether to move ahead with a new stadium within three months was the most encouraging thing to come out of local government for the Chargers in years.

But there’s one other question that had a lot of people at the combine buzzing. And that’s the question about two teams from one division partnering on a stadium project—and everything that goes along with that. Three notes on this:

1. If the Raiders and Chargers join forces on this stadium, there would have to be a realignment involving at least two teams. Because Los Angeles is America’s No. 2 television market, it would be impossible for both L.A. teams to be in the same conference. One of these teams would have to move to the NFC so that both Fox and CBS could each have an L.A. franchise in its lineup.

2. So who would move? This is all speculation, but I could see Oakland staying in the AFC West and San Diego moving to the NFC West to join a more geographically aligned division. It would be easy for the St. Louis Rams to move to the AFC West because it would mean the Rams and Chiefs would be able to form the kind of cross-state rivalry that could be excellent for both teams, and especially the occasionally attendance-strapped Rams.

So that would leave Denver, Kansas City, St. Louis and the L.A. Raiders as the new AFC West; Seattle, San Francisco, Arizona and the L.A. Chargers would make up the more geographically smart NFC West. It really wouldn’t be a very difficult solve, assuming the Chargers, who have always been an AFL or AFC team (they played their first season, 1960, in Los Angeles), wouldn’t make too big of a stink about moving to the NFC.

3. All that said, the Rams certainly will be the most aggressive team trying to move to the L.A. market. Kroenke seems determined to do it. He has the money to do it. And he was first in line. But it does make for some interesting offseason fodder in the race for Los Angeles.

 

[blue4]

Stan felt disrespected by City officials. I have been told on several occasions that if the City had approached Stan early on and worked with him thing would be very different; some on the mayors staff felt it was more important to prove they were the smartest person in the room. The problem is sometimes you're not and here we are.

Who told you that? No, I'm not being a dick, I'm genuinely curious. (Gotta step lightly in this thread)

 

[den-the-coach]

Mayor expedites S.D. stadium plan

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/12365477/san-diego-mayor-expedites-chargers-stadium-plan

SAN DIEGO -- For the first time since the team's announcement that it will pursue a joint venture with the Oakland Raiders to build a new stadium in Carson, California, Chargers owner Dean Spanos met with San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer on Sunday.

"We are pleased that the task force decided on Friday to accelerate its work and deliver a report within the next three months," the team said in a prepared statement. "This is good news for the process, and Dean joined the Mayor in supporting this expedited schedule.

"We pledged to continue to work cooperatively with the task force. Dean emphasized that we remain committed to finding a publicly acceptable stadium solution here in San Diego, but Dean also explained in detail to the Mayor the reasons that the franchise must create other options for itself in the event that an agreement is not reached."

Faulconer confirmed that he met with Spanos, agreeing to an expedited timetable for the stadium advisory group to return a recommendation on a location and finance plan for a new stadium to house the Chargers.

"I explained to Mr. Spanos that we are going to work to keep the team here but I will never support a deal that San Diego can't afford," Faulconer said in a prepared statement. "We will continue to work to produce a viable stadium plan that is fair for San Diegans, protects taxpayers and can be approved by voters.

"The stadium advisory group has agreed to speed up its efforts and will release a work product in the next 90 days. I look forward to sharing the plan with the public and the Chargers at that time."

Faulconer originally asked the stadium advisory group to make a recommendation by September when he appointed the group in January. However, the Chargers did not agree with the timeline for fear of losing business in the Los Angeles and Orange County market -- where the teams says a quarter of its revenue originates from -- with St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke's pursuit of a new stadium there.

One of the reasons the Chargers also pursued a stadium deal in Los Angeles was to put pressure on Faulconer to put together a stadium plan sooner in order to make a decision by the end of 2015, and it appears the team's efforts paid off.

The Chargers and the Raiders announced on Friday a proposal to build a privately financed, $1.7 billion stadium in Carson that the two teams would share if they relocate to the Los Angeles market.

The proposal comes a month and a half after an announcement in which a developer and a company operated by Kroenke unveiled plans to build a stadium on land he owns near Hollywood Park.

 

[Goose]

Who told you that? No, I'm not being a dick, I'm genuinely curious. (Gotta step lightly in this thread)

Blue no offense taken I complete understand the question and the skepticism since I am relatively new to this board. I am fortunate enough to know a couple of our local civic leaders. I get a chance to talk to them occasionally, as would expect this is a topic I bring up often, and they are nice enough to indulge me. No I am not an insider, I don't know what is going to happen next, and I won't ever claim to have an "inside source".

 

[blue4]

Blue no offense taken I complete understand the question and the skepticism since I am relatively new to this board. I am fortunate enough to know a couple of our local civic leaders. I get a chance to talk to them occasionally, as would expect this is a topic I bring up often, and they are nice enough to indulge me. No I am not an insider, I don't know what is going to happen next, and I won't ever claim to have an "inside source".

I'm not even skeptical, just was curious. What would you estimate about their level of optimism? I'm about 60-40 they move, although the SD OAK deal gives me a little hope.