New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

  • 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.

DthOn2Legs

Rookie
Joined
Feb 26, 2015
Messages
159
What a douchy freakin article. The NFL does not NEED LA. It's been completely fine without it for 20 years. Better off IMO. We don't want the freaking Raiders. How in the world do you think it's acceptable to not make each franchise happy? The ones you already have are the most important. Keep them happy, god dammit.
Beggars cant be choosers. At least with Oakland you'd have a more personable owner, a comparable QB with tons of upside, better WRs if they draft Cooper or White and a bonified stud at linebacker which the Rams dont have.
 

Legatron4

Legend
Joined
Aug 10, 2013
Messages
9,478
Name
Wes
Beggars cant be choosers. At least with Oakland you'd have a more personable owner, a comparable QB with tons of upside, better WRs if they draft Cooper or White and a bonified stud at linebacker which the Rams dont have.
But, they're the RAIDERS. I really think its LA or Oakland for them. I'd be suprised if they got 40k per game that first season in STL.
 

den-the-coach

Fifty-four Forty or Fight
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
23,002
Name
Dennis
Beggars cant be choosers. At least with Oakland you'd have a more personable owner, a comparable QB with tons of upside, better WRs if they draft Cooper or White and a bonified stud at linebacker which the Rams dont have.

Be careful what you wish for, Mark Davis is broke I'd rather have a rich aloof owner than a poor one dialed in, beware of the naked man who offers you the shirt off his back. I am extremely biased in this debate because I want the Rams to stay, but I will always root for the Horns, however, this stadium issue has torn me up, but I do understand @DthOn2Legs, if you can't be with the one love, love the one you're with.
 

Thordaddy

Binding you with ancient logic
Joined
Apr 5, 2012
Messages
10,462
Name
Rich
Be careful what you wish for, Mark Davis is broke I'd rather have a rich aloof owner than a poor one dialed in, beware of the naked man who offers you the shirt off his back. I am extremely biased in this debate because I want the Rams to stay, but I will always root for the Horns, however, this stadium issue has torn me up, but I do understand @DthOn2Legs, if you can't be with the one love, love the one you're with.

Yeah den I agree in many ways .but after having endured all the futility we have these many years ,I can't guarantee my attitude won't change towards the whole bunch Kroenke the team and the league if they snatch the team from us JUST when our loyalty is about to pay off.
 

den-the-coach

Fifty-four Forty or Fight
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
23,002
Name
Dennis
Yeah den I agree in many ways .but after having endured all the futility we have these many years ,I can't guarantee my attitude won't change towards the whole bunch Kroenke the team and the league if they snatch the team from us JUST when our loyalty is about to pay off.

Totally understood that's why I've been so torn, who knows how I am going to react, however, throughout my 48 years of life, Loyalty has been my greatest strength and my greatest weakness.
 

blue4

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
3,126
Name
blue4
Loyalty has been my greatest strength and my greatest weakness.

Especially if the one you are loyal to doesn't care to be loyal to you. That's one of the reasons why I'm sure STL would support a consolation prize team. If nothing more than to thumb it at the departing team.
 
Last edited:

D L

Rookie
Joined
Dec 24, 2014
Messages
237
Name
Dylan
Bernie: NFL will do what it wants
• By Bernie Miklasz

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/colu...cle_8098b84e-dd1a-589a-a6a0-e258b319899d.html

The National Football League is conducting a market study of St. Louis in an attempt to assess our level of fandom and corporate support.

This is all part of the feverish chariot race to Los Angeles pitting the Rams, Chargers and Raiders. St. Louis isn’t the only market being scrutinized by the NFL; Oakland, San Diego and LA are also going through an official league inspection.

There have been a few problems; some longtime St. Louis-based fans complained that they never received the survey, which was supposedly distributed to season-ticket holders here. It was the first sign of a potentially flawed process.

So what will the St. Louis market study show?

Easy answer: whatever the NFL wants it to show.

These NFL operatives have more moves than Marshall Faulk; you can’t hem them in. They always find wiggle room.

There’s NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, who on Wednesday praised the STL effort to get a new stadium off the ground here. But Goodell added that the NFL is considering speeding up the timetable to allow owners, including the Rams’ Stan Kroenke, to apply for relocation sooner than the league’s original Jan. 1 window.

So while Goodell says he likes what’s going on in St. Louis, he also pivots and offers that Kroenke (and others) may be allowed to apply for a move in the fall. Which, of course, would give St. Louis less time to finalize the stadium plan. If that happens, advantage Kroenke. You have to admit it: This was a nice cutback move by Goodell.

NFL executive VP Eric Grubman has also praised the progress being made toward a new St. Louis stadium. And if task-force leaders Dave Peacock and Bob Blitz can complete the land acquisition and stadium funding, then St. Louis should be in a great shape, right?

Uh, well … not necessarily.

“Your supposition is that it’s just public money that turns the key in the lock that opens the door that makes the market viable,” said Grubman, as quoted by the Orange County Register. “That’s not all there is. Let’s put the pieces together. You have to have a stadium and a financing plan … You have to have a market assessment that suggests that the market can and will be healthy for the long term so that stadium plan is supported.

“And if you do that then you’ve demonstrated viability against relocation guidelines, but it still goes to a vote. But the reason I make that distinction is that I could see a scenario where a financing plan is assembled and land is assembled and an entitlement is assembled but the market assessment is dim. And in that scenario, I don’t know that the owners would necessarily feel compelled to keep the team there.

“I could see a scenario where the market assessment is terrific and the land is assembled and the financing plan is not quite done and the owners may say, too late. let ’em go. Or they may say, let’s give them a little bit more time. That’s up to the owners.”

After absorbing all of that, please allow me to repeat what I said earlier in this piece: In the matter of franchise relocation, the league will do as it pleases. Do not even try to box these people in. It’s impossible.

This is a helpful reminder from the men who run the league. Seriously, it’s better to know what we’re up against instead of being naive and making false assumptions. I made that mistake — a big one — at the beginning of this escapade. Well, never again.

This is their league, they have full control of the process, and the relocation guidelines are essentially relocation suggestions. If this comes down to a relocation vote, the owners can disregard the rules and vote as they please.

If the NFL and its owners decide it’s smart to have the Rams head to SoCal and play in Kroenke’s spectacular new stadium, then this is exactly how things will go down.

I’m not saying situation is hopeless. It’s possible that the NFL will conduct an honorable process. And we were the first to discuss alternatives, including the NFL redirecting the Raiders to St. Louis, or Kroenke selling the Rams to buy the Raiders and set them up in Los Angeles.

A lot of this sounds goofy, but you just can’t rule anything out. This competition for the LA market already has featured surprise developments and frequent revisions to the narrative.

One thing has not changed: St. Louis must have a new stadium to stay in the game, and stay in the NFL. Peacock and Blitz have to finalize the land purchase and stadium funding as soon as possible. Without the stadium, it’s over for the NFL here. That’s the one absolute.

As for the NFL’s market study of St. Louis, I’ll try to offer some assistance.

This is a good football town that’s been stuck with bad teams and worse owners. There have been 48 NFL seasons here, with only 16 ending with a winning record, and only eight resulting in a trip to the postseason.

The Cardinals were here 28 seasons, ranked 18th in winning percentage and went 0-3 in the postseason. The Rams have been here 20 seasons, and while the “Greatest Show” era was tremendous (but brief), the franchise ranks 27th in the league in wins since moving here. Only the Raiders have won fewer games since 2004.

Despite already having endured decades of sad-sack football and having a 6-10 team and an owner plotting to move the franchise, St. Louis fans still averaged 57,000 in attendance per home game in 2014. These fans have had every reason to be demoralized but still filled the sterile Edward Jones Dome to 88 percent capacity.

I’d say this is strong but undernourished football market. One that hasn’t had the chance to enjoy many winning seasons or benefit from quality, or truly local, ownership. One that has watched home games in a cookie-cutter baseball stadium (Busch II) or in the current convention-center warehouse.

I doubt that any of this will make it to the NFL’s market-study report. The best we can hope for is that this town will receive fair treatment from the NFL. But this is the NFL’s game, and the league makes the rules. That’s the reality.


Fuck.
 

Sum1

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
3,604
I think most of you know that I try not to post BS or he said/she said/I know a guy...so take this as you will because though I don't believe it is BS it does fall into the "I know a guy" category.

Well, someone close to me recently had a meeting with a higher up with the St. Louis Sports Commission and told him that the new STL stadium is a 99% done deal and there is a financing plan that hasn't been disclosed yet.

He didn't say anything about who would be playing in it or any other details. So, like I said...take it as you will, I just wanted to pass along some info I've heard from what I consider a credible source.
 

BuiltRamTough

Pro Bowler
Joined
Nov 16, 2011
Messages
1,209
Name
Edmond
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/03/25/kurt-warner-rams-have-built-in-fan-base-in-l-a/


PHOENIX—The best quarterback in the short history of the Rams in St. Louis prefers that the team remain in the Gateway to the West rather than migrate West. But Kurt Warner concedes to Breitbart Sports that a reboot in Los Angeles makes sense for the franchise.

“To me, when I hear Rams, it’s synonymous with St. Louis, I’m a part of that history, I’m part of that franchise,” Warner told Breitbart Sports at the NFL owner’s meeting in Phoenix on Tuesday. “When I think back to the memory of the St. Louis Rams, they are all going to be around the St. Louis community.”

But Warner also realizes the Rams have a rich history in Los Angeles, playing in that city from 1946 through 1994, and would be a natural fit from whence they came.

“I’m also realistic and understand how that fits for the NFL, how it fits for the Rams to move back to L.A.,” Warner said. “When I was with the St. Louis Rams, and every time I would go out to L.A., you would be amazed at the number of people who would come up and say, ‘Thanks for the great season. I’ve been a Rams fans my entire life.’ There is a built-in fan base in L.A.”

The Rams have been playing in St. Louis since 1995, following a move from Los Angeles. The team originally played in Cleveland. One of the greatest players of their 20-year history in St. Louis is quarterback Kurt Warner.

After graduating from Northern Iowa in 1993, he bagged groceries and bounced around the Arena League and NFL Europe before finally landing a third-string quarterback job with the Rams in 1998.

In 1999, he moved up to second-string, and when starting quarterback Trent Green suffered a season-ending knee injury in the preseason, Warner took over and led the Rams to a Super Bowl victory in his first season as a starter. In the Rams’s Super Bowl win over the Tennessee Titans, Warner threw for two touchdowns and a Super Bowl-record 414 passing yards.

Two years later, he led the Rams to another Super Bowl appearance, but they lost to the New England Patriots on a last second field goal. Warner’s road to St. Louis, and his magical career with the Rams, played like a Hollywood script. Near Tinseltown, Rams owner Stan Kroenke wants to build a $1.86 million stadium on a tract of land he owns, and eventually host two NFL teams, with the Rams likely being one of them.

Warner has mixed feelings.

“So when people think about Los Angeles, the Rams are the first thing that comes to mind because it’s synonymous with that team,” Warner maintained. “It makes sense to me that would be a good move and smart move to have built-in fan base for a team that moves there.

“But for more personally, I’d like for them to stay in St. Louis because I love the community there, and my history would stay with that team. But I definitely see both sides of it.”

He would make a good politician they way he worked the middle on this issue. But he is clearly not categorically opposed to a Rams move to Los Angeles.
 

den-the-coach

Fifty-four Forty or Fight
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
23,002
Name
Dennis
He didn't say anything about who would be playing in it or any other details. So, like I said...take it as you will, I just wanted to pass along some info I've heard from what I consider a credible source.

I have little doubt the Riverfront Stadium won't be built, however, like you posted @Sum1 who will be playing in that stadium is like To be, or not to be, that is the question?
 

dieterbrock

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
24,058
Especially if the one you are loyal to doesn't care to be loyal to you. That's one of the reasons why I'm sure STL would support a consolation prize team. If nothing more than to thumb it at the departing team.
While I could understand having angst, I dont see why its fair to blame "the team".
Its not any of the players/coaches, who comprise "The Team" that would be the reason for the move.
 

Angry Ram

Captain RAmerica Original Rammer
Joined
Jul 1, 2010
Messages
18,000
I am so sick of this whole thing, and I am simply sickened that the powers-that-be at the time St. Louis first got the Rams were freaking dumb enough to put that 'first tier stadium' language in the contract.

If we don't keep the Rams then I don't know what I'll do, but right now I'm leaning toward not watching ANY NFL team. (And yet that little voice inside my head that has kept me a Rams' fan for 50 years keeps telling me that I have lived a Rams' fan and that I will die being a Rams' fan. Still, there are times when that is seeming less and less likely, sad to say).

One of my friends is a big NFL fan. He told me he doesn't give a damn about news/rumors/off-field drama. He just wants to watch his team and entertaining games on Sundays. I'm taking his viewpoints and making them my own. I think, if I do that, my fandom will remain ( like you, my interest is going down right now).
 

BuiltRamTough

Pro Bowler
Joined
Nov 16, 2011
Messages
1,209
Name
Edmond
Bernie: NFL will do what it wants
• By Bernie Miklasz

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/colu...cle_8098b84e-dd1a-589a-a6a0-e258b319899d.html

The National Football League is conducting a market study of St. Louis in an attempt to assess our level of fandom and corporate support.

This is all part of the feverish chariot race to Los Angeles pitting the Rams, Chargers and Raiders. St. Louis isn’t the only market being scrutinized by the NFL; Oakland, San Diego and LA are also going through an official league inspection.

There have been a few problems; some longtime St. Louis-based fans complained that they never received the survey, which was supposedly distributed to season-ticket holders here. It was the first sign of a potentially flawed process.

So what will the St. Louis market study show?

Easy answer: whatever the NFL wants it to show.

These NFL operatives have more moves than Marshall Faulk; you can’t hem them in. They always find wiggle room.

There’s NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, who on Wednesday praised the STL effort to get a new stadium off the ground here. But Goodell added that the NFL is considering speeding up the timetable to allow owners, including the Rams’ Stan Kroenke, to apply for relocation sooner than the league’s original Jan. 1 window.

So while Goodell says he likes what’s going on in St. Louis, he also pivots and offers that Kroenke (and others) may be allowed to apply for a move in the fall. Which, of course, would give St. Louis less time to finalize the stadium plan. If that happens, advantage Kroenke. You have to admit it: This was a nice cutback move by Goodell.

NFL executive VP Eric Grubman has also praised the progress being made toward a new St. Louis stadium. And if task-force leaders Dave Peacock and Bob Blitz can complete the land acquisition and stadium funding, then St. Louis should be in a great shape, right?

Uh, well … not necessarily.

“Your supposition is that it’s just public money that turns the key in the lock that opens the door that makes the market viable,” said Grubman, as quoted by the Orange County Register. “That’s not all there is. Let’s put the pieces together. You have to have a stadium and a financing plan … You have to have a market assessment that suggests that the market can and will be healthy for the long term so that stadium plan is supported.

“And if you do that then you’ve demonstrated viability against relocation guidelines, but it still goes to a vote. But the reason I make that distinction is that I could see a scenario where a financing plan is assembled and land is assembled and an entitlement is assembled but the market assessment is dim. And in that scenario, I don’t know that the owners would necessarily feel compelled to keep the team there.

“I could see a scenario where the market assessment is terrific and the land is assembled and the financing plan is not quite done and the owners may say, too late. let ’em go. Or they may say, let’s give them a little bit more time. That’s up to the owners.”

After absorbing all of that, please allow me to repeat what I said earlier in this piece: In the matter of franchise relocation, the league will do as it pleases. Do not even try to box these people in. It’s impossible.

This is a helpful reminder from the men who run the league. Seriously, it’s better to know what we’re up against instead of being naive and making false assumptions. I made that mistake — a big one — at the beginning of this escapade. Well, never again.

This is their league, they have full control of the process, and the relocation guidelines are essentially relocation suggestions. If this comes down to a relocation vote, the owners can disregard the rules and vote as they please.

If the NFL and its owners decide it’s smart to have the Rams head to SoCal and play in Kroenke’s spectacular new stadium, then this is exactly how things will go down.

I’m not saying situation is hopeless. It’s possible that the NFL will conduct an honorable process. And we were the first to discuss alternatives, including the NFL redirecting the Raiders to St. Louis, or Kroenke selling the Rams to buy the Raiders and set them up in Los Angeles.

A lot of this sounds goofy, but you just can’t rule anything out. This competition for the LA market already has featured surprise developments and frequent revisions to the narrative.

One thing has not changed: St. Louis must have a new stadium to stay in the game, and stay in the NFL. Peacock and Blitz have to finalize the land purchase and stadium funding as soon as possible. Without the stadium, it’s over for the NFL here. That’s the one absolute.

As for the NFL’s market study of St. Louis, I’ll try to offer some assistance.

This is a good football town that’s been stuck with bad teams and worse owners. There have been 48 NFL seasons here, with only 16 ending with a winning record, and only eight resulting in a trip to the postseason.

The Cardinals were here 28 seasons, ranked 18th in winning percentage and went 0-3 in the postseason. The Rams have been here 20 seasons, and while the “Greatest Show” era was tremendous (but brief), the franchise ranks 27th in the league in wins since moving here. Only the Raiders have won fewer games since 2004.

Despite already having endured decades of sad-sack football and having a 6-10 team and an owner plotting to move the franchise, St. Louis fans still averaged 57,000 in attendance per home game in 2014. These fans have had every reason to be demoralized but still filled the sterile Edward Jones Dome to 88 percent capacity.

I’d say this is strong but undernourished football market. One that hasn’t had the chance to enjoy many winning seasons or benefit from quality, or truly local, ownership. One that has watched home games in a cookie-cutter baseball stadium (Busch II) or in the current convention-center warehouse.

I doubt that any of this will make it to the NFL’s market-study report. The best we can hope for is that this town will receive fair treatment from the NFL. But this is the NFL’s game, and the league makes the rules. That’s the reality.


After the recent owners meetings Bernie and others start hearing things and they start to realize what they already knew. The NFL will do what it's in their best interest. They don't care about Oak,SD and STL. There ways to bypass the bylaws. Who knows what the market assessment will actually show. Basically what the league is saying is...if you get the money and build a stadium and the market assessment is not to our liking the team qualifies for a move. Lol wtf? That's the leagues fallback option now. So when a team moves Roger and this Grubman fellow will stand up on a podium and say "the market assessment was not good for the long term in that particular market. And I think maybe just my opinion, if they want the Rams or SD to move and they feel like those cities are coming up with a financial plan fast they'll just move the relocation date sooner the October to like a special meeting/vote. They'll say sorry you guys were too late. The NFL finds ways to get out of holes. All that shit that happened this year and they still hot high TV rating and everyone's pumped for 2015.
This Bernie quote though.

"This is a helpful reminder from the men who run the league. Seriously, it’s better to know what we’re up against instead of being naive and making false assumptions. I made that mistake — a big one — at the beginning of this escapade."
"This is their league, they have full control of the process, and the relocation guidelines are essentially relocation suggestions. If this comes down to a relocation vote, the owners can disregard the guidelines and vote as they desire."
 

myronjax

UDFA
Joined
Jul 18, 2013
Messages
31
I want the Rams to stay. That's my position. After hearing/reading all of this speculation that St. Louis could get the consolation prize of the Raiders, It begs the question: how does that work?? Would the NFL simply tell Davis to move? Can they force a team from one city halfway across the continent to another? Davis doesn't seem interested in St. Louis-at least for now. The city of Oakland is partnering with Alameda County to come up with a solution-this is in it's early stages, and results are far, far away-does Davis give this teamwork a chance so that they can remain in Oakland? I'm just not seeing the dots to be connected with the Raiders coming here.
 

bluecoconuts

Legend
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
13,073
I think most of you know that I try not to post BS or he said/she said/I know a guy...so take this as you will because though I don't believe it is BS it does fall into the "I know a guy" category.

Well, someone close to me recently had a meeting with a higher up with the St. Louis Sports Commission and told him that the new STL stadium is a 99% done deal and there is a financing plan that hasn't been disclosed yet.

He didn't say anything about who would be playing in it or any other details. So, like I said...take it as you will, I just wanted to pass along some info I've heard from what I consider a credible source.

Not to be "that" guy, but I'm not so sure how this is possible. The financing can fall through if the house votes with a greater than 2/3rd majority on that bill that went through the senate. Unless they have some inside information about how they will vote. Even then, 99% would seem too high, because Kroenke still needs to put in his half of the bill, and if he says no, then that's that.

I don't doubt that they'll get the financing figured out, I just can't imagine that it's done now, or that it can be 99% a done deal when Kroenke hasn't said he'll pitch in yet.
 

bluecoconuts

Legend
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
13,073
I want the Rams to stay. That's my position. After hearing/reading all of this speculation that St. Louis could get the consolation prize of the Raiders, It begs the question: how does that work?? Would the NFL simply tell Davis to move? Can they force a team from one city halfway across the continent to another? Davis doesn't seem interested in St. Louis-at least for now. The city of Oakland is partnering with Alameda County to come up with a solution-this is in it's early stages, and results are far, far away-does Davis give this teamwork a chance so that they can remain in Oakland? I'm just not seeing the dots to be connected with the Raiders coming here.

If the Rams and the Chargers were to move to Los Angeles, and Oakland was unable to come up with a solution, they'd probably dangle St Louis as an option. They won't be able to force it, but they can give him a little push.
 

blue4

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
3,126
Name
blue4
While I could understand having angst, I dont see why its fair to blame "the team".
Its not any of the players/coaches, who comprise "The Team" that would be the reason for the move.

Who said anything about blaming players or coaches? I'm sure a good many STL fans including myself will follow those players throughout their careers, regardless of who they play for. That won't stop the fans from being unhappy about losing the Rams, or won't stop them from being relieved at getting someone else like the Raiders. I'm sure there might be a few small number of fans who, upon losing the Rams, might prefer to have nothing at all. Drive up the highway and see blight and junk. But I think most of the fans here, upon hearing of another team, will say good riddance Stan if you don't want to be here and enjoy their new downtown with some other team. We've been loyal fans to the organization, and now the organization wants to move on. The players have nothing to do with it, why would anyone blame them?
 

blue4

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
3,126
Name
blue4
If the Rams and the Chargers were to move to Los Angeles, and Oakland was unable to come up with a solution, they'd probably dangle St Louis as an option. They won't be able to force it, but they can give him a little push.


He'd be a damned fool not too. The Chargers, 9ers and Rams on his doorstep? The losingest team of the 4 in a crumbling stadium with no more LA leverage? It's as much a lifeline for him as it would be for us.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.