New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[BuiltRamTough]

Figures! Ok, let me draw this out. Money for food, housing, and everyday living is of no matter to a billionaire. That's a working poor man's concern. At some point billionaire becomes decensitized by all that he has and wants something bigger. Something that makes a more recognized impact on society. Stan is 70 years old. It is far fetched to say he will be dead in 14 years. That's not much time at all! He's got a heck of a lot of money and several nice retreats. But does he have a legacy? Did he do something bigger or more incredible than swell his money bank and, own land, and have some sports teams? What his one diamond ring accomplishment? You better believe that's going through his mind and without it he'll die a typical greedy man's death. So you can see, it's bigger than money just money. Money does not but you a legacy, the people give you that. He wants power and recognition to trump many other owners in innovation and power. He can do that by going to LA. It would be his crown jewel. So wouldn't the other owners love to make him settle in STL and LA would split those benefits between the Chargers and Raiders? Thats why Peacock hinted that Stan could sell the team if Stan becomes malcontent in being trumped. Nobody likes Stan. And his new found LA fan buddies would drop him like a rock if the team does not move. He just wants that diamond.

In your previous posts you said Stan is using leverage to build a stadium in STL and that is his endgame. Then you said he wants to by the Broncos. Now you're saying he wants the crown jewl in LA for legacy. He can't have all 3.So which one is it?

 

[blue4]

So if that is your narrow conclusion and there is no swaying you, hypothetical, do I flip a coin? The answer is no because you would still be unhappy. Just keep spinning. Evenentually you fall and realize the spinning was the true problem.

Yeah, that's my "narrow conclusion". You're arguing 3 different things to 3 different people and being an ass.

Moderators note: I left this one even though you called him an ass. The reason? I deleted several of Mr. St Louis' posts for the reasons you gave in this response.

Now can we get back to discussing this issue like Rams fans?

 

[bluecoconuts]

So wouldn't the other owners love to make him settle in STL and LA would split those benefits between the Chargers and Raiders? Thats why Peacock hinted that Stan could sell the team if Stan becomes malcontent in being trumped. Nobody likes Stan. And his new found LA fan buddies would drop him like a rock if the team does not move. He just wants that diamond.

This is where you lose me, why exactly would the owners love to force Stan to "settle" in St Louis? Out of spite because you say they don't like him? Then in return he could, in theory, destroy the St Louis market? Refuse to take place in the riverfront idea, just hike up ticket prices, and destroy the fanbase as much as possible. Like you said, he doesn't need the money. So with the fanbase utterly destroyed, the NFL is pretty fucked, and their profits are way down. I just don't think the NFL is going to go and try to screw him just because they feel like it, makes zero sense, and is a poor business move.

Full disclaimer, I don't think the above is going to happen, especially Stan trying to ruin the market out of spite.

You use good logic. But to "penpoint" the subject that is much larger than the size of the point of a pen is flawed in itself. Therefore, you have built your house on sand and are trying to figure out why the roof leaks. You should start over and try again. Maybe you can salvage some of these points.

Of course trying to penpoint something is silly. Pinpoint though, is another thing..

 

[mr.stlouis]

Yeah, that's my "narrow conclusion". You're arguing 3 different things to 3 different people and being an ass.

Stan has options of which we don't know the full limitations to. But the real question is where do his priorities lye. I have stated a few of them but even I don't know the order. LA is acting as leverage for all three cities, Stan would make more money in LA, he is from MO, the NFL can sweeten the pot, he would like to buy the Broncos, and all these factor into the stadium situations. I didn't even mention Carson. The fact of the matter is there are many more factors than than I just stated and they all play a roll. Most haven't even played out yet.

Line deleted.

I am guilty of making arguments in the whim of the moment. But it's not like I'm wrong, I'm just playing from multiple sides. It's good to diversify. I don't have just one yes or no stance just like this issue is far from clear cut. You must learn to adabt. Be water, my friend.

 

[mr.stlouis]

This is where you lose me, why exactly would the owners love to force Stan to "settle" in St Louis? Out of spite because you say they don't like him? Then in return he could, in theory, destroy the St Louis market? Refuse to take place in the riverfront idea, just hike up ticket prices, and destroy the fanbase as much as possible. Like you said, he doesn't need the money. So with the fanbase utterly destroyed, the NFL is pretty fucked, and their profits are way down. I just don't think the NFL is going to go and try to screw him just because they feel like it, makes zero sense, and is a poor business move.

Full disclaimer, I don't think the above is going to happen, especially Stan trying to ruin the market out of spite.



Of course trying to penpoint something is silly. Pinpoint though, is another thing..

Point taken

First slip up I made all day. It's the egg You dropped that you remember best.

 

[BuiltRamTough]

Ehhhh, in the case of Stan I think it's more about legacy than money. For Davis and Spanos is probably more about money. However Kroenke would probably see a bigger increase and more money than either of those two teams with respects to how each project is designed.

However I don't think the owners could really say that he can't do something because it'll make him too much money and be unfair or anything like that. They probably want that, the more money he makes the more they make.

Sorry man I can't buy that. If a Stan cared about his legacy he would honor his word and stay in STL and try his best to get a stadium deal in STL and he wouldn't alienate the people in STL and screw them over and not say 1 fucking word. He could say my first option is to stay in STL just like what Mark Davis and Spanos say. That's called protecting your legacy. If he goes to LA whatever people might say about him in the future, He was the man that bought NFL back to LA. But we will all know why he went to LA. He can't fool us.

 

[blue4]

Stan has options of which we don't know the full limitations to. But the real question is where do his priorities lye. I have stated a few of them but even I don't know the order order. LA is acting as leverage for all three cities, Stan would make more money in LA, he is from MO, the NFL can sweeten the pot, he would like to buy the Broncos, and all these factor into the stadium situations. I didn't even mention Carson. The fact of the matter is there are many more factors than than I just stated and they all play a roll. Most haven't even played out yet.

So I have a question for you now. Being I just layed out part of this very broad topic and you tried to borrow it down, do you feel silly? I really wanna know .

I am guilty of making arguments in the whim of the moment. But it's not like I'm wrong, I'm just playing from multiple sides. It's good to diversify. I don't have just one yes or no stance just like this issue is far from clear cut. You must learn to adabt. Be water, my friend.

What on earth do I have to feel silly about? What are you even talking about? WTF does borrowing down mean? At what point are you going to realize I never quoted you, never challenged one of your many conflicting theories, nor conversed with you in any way before you decided to mistake me for someone else. Do you think you're talking to bluecoconuts or something? We're not the same person. I've never said a word about Carson, the only thing I've said in the last 20 pages is that no one can claim to have true idea what's on Stan's mind. You don't know if he wants the Broncos or not.

So again, are you just confused or are you being an ass because you think it's funny?

 

[BuiltRamTough]

People have to understand that at the end of the day the team value of the Rams is 32nd right now. Stan and his financial experts say. Ok how can we change this? How can we increase the value of our team? Stan sees LA is open for business and he points his finger to LA. Does his research and says basically over night the value of the team will go to the top 10 maybe top 5. Keep in mind the stadium costs 1.66 bill and he bought the land for 100mill. But we don't how much of that 1.66 will be straight from his pocket. It might be 500mill psl 300mil naming rights. Etc so for maybe 1 bill Stan will double up. We're talking about a business move that will double up on a billion. You kidding me? That's money. His worth 5 bill now in a couple of years if he has his way he could be work 7-8 bill. Legacy my ass

 

[Hacksaw]

WOW, It's hot in here.

This whole discussion is like that weird dress a few weeks ago. Is it Blue and Black or White and Tan? Same dress, different perceptions.

A ton of evidence has come out, but how much is fact, legal posturing, opponent spin, leverage or actual truth? NOBODY in StL or LA or in a Wal-Mart near you knows anything.

I guess a few words from Stan would really help us all get to the reality / truth. Until then it's all purely speculation since he hasn't.
Trying to prove a guess is like making logical sense out of an emotion.

The owners meeting this weekend may be the first time we get a leak from actual owners who's teams are not directly involved in all this. I hope so anyway.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Sorry man I can't buy that. If a Stan cared about his legacy he would honor his word and stay in STL and try his best to get a stadium deal in STL and he wouldn't alienate the people in STL and screw them over and not say 1 freaking word. He could say my first option is to stay in STL just like what Mark Davis and Spanos say. That's called protecting your legacy. If he goes to LA whatever people might say about him in the future, He was the man that bought NFL back to LA. But we will all know why he went to LA. He can't fool us.

Maybe, I dunno. Just a guess on my part really. Stan can have a nice legacy in St Louis by staying there and building the new stadium, but that'd be a local legacy. Being the guy who brought the NFL back to Los Angeles would give him a much bigger legacy, and there have been some that say it might make him one of the biggest names in sports in general. The extra money is of course very nice, but he's not going to sell the team, so it's not like he'll actually see that cash. So my guess is what does he want his legacy to be once he dies? A very rich guy who had a few sports teams, and built a nice stadium in St Louis? Or a very rich guy, who owned major teams, and brought the NFL back to Los Angeles into a palace?

Being the guy to bring the team back to LA is bigger. Sure people in St Louis would be pissed, and to them he sucks, but the rest of the sporting world he's a guy who made shit happen.

 

[Hacksaw]

So my guess is what does he want his legacy to be once he dies? A very rich guy who had a few sports teams, and built a nice stadium in St Louis? Or a very rich guy, who owned major teams, and brought the NFL back to Los Angeles into a palace?

Being the guy to bring the team back to LA is bigger. Sure people in St Louis would be pissed, and to them he sucks, but the rest of the sporting world he's a guy who made crap happen.

The numbers work in favor of your opinion.

LA, Orange, Riverside, Ventura and Ontario counties = over 15,000,000
The entire state of Missouri = 6,063,589

 

[den-the-coach]

The numbers work in favor of your opinion.

LA, Orange, Riverside, Ventura and Ontario counties = over 15,000,000
The entire state of Missouri = 6,063,589

Are those 15,000,000 legal or illegal? Sorry I could not resist.

 

[BuiltRamTough]

Maybe, I dunno. Just a guess on my part really. Stan can have a nice legacy in St Louis by staying there and building the new stadium, but that'd be a local legacy. Being the guy who brought the NFL back to Los Angeles would give him a much bigger legacy, and there have been some that say it might make him one of the biggest names in sports in general. The extra money is of course very nice, but he's not going to sell the team, so it's not like he'll actually see that cash. So my guess is what does he want his legacy to be once he dies? A very rich guy who had a few sports teams, and built a nice stadium in St Louis? Or a very rich guy, who owned major teams, and brought the NFL back to Los Angeles into a palace?

Being the guy to bring the team back to LA is bigger. Sure people in St Louis would be pissed, and to them he sucks, but the rest of the sporting world he's a guy who made crap happen.

I get what your saying. I just can't underestimate the power of money and greed.

 

[Hacksaw]

Are those 15,000,000 legal or illegal? Sorry I could not resist.

Ha Ha! A valid question Den although most of the illegals are Raiders fans. lol

I miss your Deacon avi.

 

[mr.stlouis]

Here you go, fellas. Your biggest fear...

Clearly there is a boat load we don't know about to warrant this. Maybe this is part of the very incouraging news Demoff was talking about. Veeerry interesting. There are far fewer pro STL articles than LA articles. So this is pretty bold.

http://www.inquisitr.com/1943520/st...anning-to-block-l-a-move/#d5EX3jWQ8DxU4kXK.99

 

[Hacksaw]

The link took me to a 'national inquirer' looking web page and the article named no author.

 

[mr.stlouis]

It did say rumor at the beginning. But we know how rumors can grow after looking at Inglewood.

Maybe it has something to do with this Carson getting 14k signatures to bring it to a public vote? Could the NFL be leaning towards Carson? We simply do not know.

 

[Hacksaw]

Regarding Carson, I would think the league would lean that way if the Raiders and Chargers were both going to move there. 2 teams seems to be their preference in LA.
Does that mean 1 team + continued leverage? 2 teams? More leverage for all 3 teams trying to hold up their current cities?
If anything derails Carson (ie: SD or OAK staying put of methane remediation or something similar) does it change the leagues stance on Inglewood assuming the Goodell rumor has validity?

Inglewood is building something nice. What we are not certain.
StL is trying to afford to build something nice. If they can is not certain.
Oak and SD are following StL's lead and putting out renderings and forming task forces. Is it all legit, posturing, LA leverage at work? Well none of that is certain either.

We are just here going along for the ride until something is certain. Then we will still go along for the ride.
Perhaps something more certain will come out after this weekends owners meetings.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Here you go, fellas. Your biggest fear...

Clearly there is a boat load we don't know about to warrant this. Maybe this is part of the very incouraging news Demoff was talking about. Veeerry interesting. There are far fewer pro STL articles than LA articles. So this is pretty bold.

http://www.inquisitr.com/1943520/st...anning-to-block-l-a-move/#d5EX3jWQ8DxU4kXK.99

I'll be interested in seeing if that gains traction. They had a pretty glaring mistake, which makes me question the validity of the rest of it though

 

[Hacksaw]

From the article that inspired the 'inquirer' post.

"St. Louis has come back with a new proposal for a state-of-the-art, open-air stadium in the city's blighted north riverfront section that includes $400 million in public financing. The plan has a lot of potential pitfalls, the least of which is getting Kroenke to the table now that he has one foot in the California sand. But there is growing sentiment inside the league that after a year of gaffes by the NFL front office, the last thing it can afford to do is alienate more fans while leaving a pile of stadium money on the table. "Goodell won't let Stan move to LA," one NFL owner told ESPN. "Because Goodell would catch holy hell for moving a team from a market willing to spend hundreds of millions to keep a team."
It's not clear at this point what role, if any, NFL approval will play in Los Angeles. Dallas owner Jerry Jones has already said that Kroenke doesn't need the NFL's permission to move the Rams. It's an opinion backed by federal antitrust laws and argued in court by Al Davis, who moved his Raiders franchise to LA in 1982 and then back to Oakland 13 years later. Kroenke could follow that lead. It would be an ugly, drawn-out public spectacle, and the Rams would be a lame-duck franchise for years. But in the past, and with far less at stake, Kroenke has never shied 
away from a fight in court. For the time being, Kroenke's camp is saying he won't go against the NFL's wishes.

And a court fight is exactly what the NFL doesn't want.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/page...l-chaos-plan-move-team-los-angeles?src=mobile