New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[Hacksaw]

You and I read things very differently. There was nothing between the lines or otherwise that would indicate it can only be the Rams. Mara mentioned that there should be one stadium for two teams and the biggest hurdle to two teams in a stadium is coming to an agreement on an partnership. The Chargers and Raiders already have that agreement.

So Goose, Mara says "the biggest hurdle to two teams in a stadium is coming to an agreement on an partnership". Then you stated, what is commonly known, that Oakland and San Diego already have that agreement.
So wouldn't that exclude SD and/or OAK from Mara's equation? It's also been noted that ESK and Spanos are not on the same page.

After listening to the part again, Mara speaks of a scenario he is familiar with in NY but it speaks of a partnership specifically. ESK's place won't be a partnership. It's his place with a tenant. But who knows? I don't speak fluent ambiguous.

 

[Goose]

So Goose, Mara says "the biggest hurdle to two teams in a stadium is coming to an agreement on an partnership". Then you stated, what is commonly known, that Oakland and San Diego already have that agreement.
So wouldn't that exclude SD and/or OAK from Mara's equation? It's also been noted that ESK and Spanos are not on the same page.

After listening to the part again, Mara speaks of a scenario he is familiar with in NY but it speaks of a partnership specifically. ESK's place won't be a partnership. It's his place with a tenant. But who knows? I don't speak fluent ambiguous.

Hacksaw I think this is a great example of how two people hears something different. I would think it lends more support to Chargers/Raiders and not exclude them. Your other comment about ESK is interesting and I have heard the same thing about Spano and Stan but that really is just conjecture. However, if you believe that only two teams will be in Southern California and the Charges are going to be one than you have to wonder if a Chargers/Rams deal could really work.

 

[iced]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/04/15/carson-stadium-moves-toward-city-council-vote/

Carson stadium moves toward city council vote
Posted by Mike Florio on April 15, 2015, 8:47 PM EDT

Getty Images
With the powers-that-be in San Diego possibly not moving quickly enough to get build a stadium that would keep the Chargers in town, the folks in Carson are moving like grease through the proverbial goose. (#Pulitzer.)

Via the Los Angeles Times, the Los Angeles County Registrar’s office has certified the signatures obtained in support of the Carson project. The Carson City Council will vote on the measure next Tuesday.

Carson and Inglewood currently are racing toward securing formal approval to build a stadium that would host one or two NFL teams. But there won’t be two stadiums; it’s one or the other.

The move comes a day after NFL executive V.P. Eric Grubman visited San Diego. Per U-T San Diego, Grubman explained that San Diego already is lagging behind the L.A. proposals, pointing out that the San Diego project lacks a stadium design, specific funding sources, or support from the Chargers.

Far more ominous for San Diego is the fact that it trails the other two cities hoping to keep franchises in place: Oakland and St. Louis.

“They have a specific site and they have at least the outline of a funding plan in terms of where the different pieces of financing would come from,” Grubman said. “They have a design of a stadium which has months of work behind it.”

There’s a sense that the Chargers and the NFL are going through the motions with San Diego, hopeful that San Diego eventually will give up. Even if San Diego doesn’t cry uncle, it looks like uncle eventually will be declared.

 

[ramfan46]

Inglewood is being built to house 2 teams. The biggest hurdle is financing for Carson. No major details have been announced and Davis himself said he had no input in the design presented in February. Carson still has quite a ways to go to being a reality. I just don't see how Oakland or San Diego could announce a completed Carson deal by Dec/Jan. Then both teams need temporary homes. Then the question of realignment comes up where you talk about breaking up the AFC West and NFC West. The Rams don't change anything in the league structure with a move to Los Angeles. Plus the league will still use Inglewood as a threat to San Diego or Oakland if they don't come through with stadium money. Just my opinion of how things are playing out.

 

[Goose]

Inglewood is being built to house 2 teams. The biggest hurdle is financing for Carson. No major details have been announced and Davis himself said he had no input in the design presented in February. Carson still has quite a ways to go to being a reality. I just don't see how Oakland or San Diego could announce a completed Carson deal by Dec/Jan. Then both teams need temporary homes. Then the question of realignment comes up where you talk about breaking up the AFC West and NFC West. The Rams don't change anything in the league structure with a move to Los Angeles. Plus the league will still use Inglewood as a threat to San Diego or Oakland if they don't come through with stadium money. Just my opinion of how things are playing out.

Inglewood may indeed be able to house two teams but they will not be on even footing. Stan will want his team to be the primary, wants the market to himself for at least a year, and the second team and Stan would have to negotiate an agreement which I don't image will go smoothly. Goldman-Sachs are backing the Carson project and even ensured they will cover any loses the Charges may incur do to the move. That sounds like a pretty solid financial planning to me. Carson still has time to shore up the details. The Carson project is not on a timeline the markets trying to keep the team is. The land and the financing are done for Carson. A majority of the clean up is complete and according to reports is safe. Additional cleanup steps need to take place but it is nothing that will prevent the project from moving forward. They have gather enough signatures to bypass the vote. They have already struck a deal with the unions for Carson. I am pretty sure that the design details are being discussed and adjusted. I see no reason why that site would not be shovel ready towards the end of the calendar year. Moving the Rams absolutely changes the league and you'd be foolish to thing it does not. The Raiders have already offered to switch conferences and although it may not be optimal it is not something that hasn't happened before.

 

[Hacksaw]

Hacksaw I think this is a great example of how two people hears something different. I would think it lends more support to Chargers/Raiders and not exclude them. Your other comment about ESK is interesting and I have heard the same thing about Spano and Stan but that really is just conjecture. However, if you believe that only two teams will be in Southern California and the Chargers are going to be one than you have to wonder if a Chargers/Rams deal could really work.

It seems cleaner because of the divisional stuff.
Perhaps I should have said the lack of and agreeable partnership contradicts Mara's assertion that there is still a divide but we know SD and OAK are working together. Blue and black dress or white and tan? lol
Oakland is like the little lost dog in all this. The fans are nothing more than the landmine the little dog left behind.

 

[BuiltRamTough]

If the Chargers or Raiders or Goldman Sachs buy the land and it's officially announced then I think it will be a real "stadium race".

Let's see if they could put their money where their mouth is.

 

[Hacksaw]

Inglewood may indeed be able to house two teams but they will not be on even footing. (1) Stan will want his team to be the primary, wants the market to himself for at least a year, and the second team and Stan would have to negotiate an agreement which I don't image will go smoothly.

(2) Goldman-Sachs are backing the Carson project and even ensured they will cover any loses the Chargers may incur do to the move. That sounds like a pretty solid financial planning to me. Carson still has time to shore up the details. (3) The Carson project is not on a timeline the markets trying to keep their team is. (4) The land and the financing are done for Carson. (5) A majority of the clean up is complete and according to reports is safe. Additional cleanup steps need to take place but it is nothing that will prevent the project from moving forward. They have gather enough signatures to bypass the vote. They have already struck a deal with the unions for Carson. I am pretty sure that the design details are being discussed and adjusted. (6) I see no reason why that site would not be shovel ready towards the end of the calendar year. (7) Moving the Rams absolutely changes the league and you'd be foolish to think it does not. The Raiders have already offered to switch conferences and although it may not be optimal it is not something that hasn't happened before.

Brother Goose, what happened here? (1) You are correct, ESK said he want's a chance to build the brand and sponsorships for a few seasons since he's building the place. Then he's open to another team coming in. This was stated after the last meetings. But to assume that it won't go smoothly is only an opinion. (2) Goldman Sachs are not investing, they are helping line it up. To date nothing has been reported of who specifically would be investing anything. (3) If the Carson project doesn't deliver a solid financial plan and address the environmental issues, then how would the league approve it over Inglewood? Do you think that the owners would approve Carson and turn down Stan's solid plan if those questions aren't answered. (4) Same as 3, also the land and financing aren't done,, at least not yet. (5) Where did you read from an official source that the clean up is almost done. First off the methane and toxic dump are still there. It regenerates itself. Liquefaction and oil sludge are common in that area too. I live near by and that part of LA sucks. (6) Perhaps it will be, but you can't see a reason? (7) This is the comment that got me to reply. The Rams were in LA when the divisions we set up (save the last realignment where they remained in the west). The Rams are in the NFC west where LA is. Conference re alignment is a huge deal Rambro. Chargers, Raiders, Broncos and KC have all been in the same division over 45 years. They were in the AFL west before the merger. Breaking them up is insanity. The Rams have been in the NFC for 75+ years and moving them is blasphemy. Moving them to where they played for 48 seasons is the least change of any scenario beside no change at all. Except to the fine fans of StL of course.

 

[8to12]

The St.Louis Rams are where they belong and need to be, in St.Louis. I like the sound of the LA Raiders better. The only city that can argue about the team returning home is Cleveland not LA, remember. The Rams are here to stay.

The Rams originated in Cleveland but Called LA home for 50 years. That's way longer in LA than in Cleveland. If 50 years in one place isn't home, I don't know what else is.

 

[blue4]

The Rams originated in Cleveland but Called LA home for 50 years. That's way longer in LA than in Cleveland. If 50 years in one place isn't home, I don't know what else is.

20 more recent years would be home.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Just put the entire NFL in LA. Stan can build an 80 million seat stadium and be the owner of every team. In fact, make him the commissioner, and the president, and the CEO of everything. Let's name it the SKL. The Stan Kroenke League. He can play all the positions and win the next 500 Super Bowls.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/nfl-to-move-all-32-teams-to-los-angeles,1845/

As for all the different comments, to me it indicated that they would like Spanos and Kroenke to partner up. Spanos may not like it, but I think he'll do it for the stadium. He also doesn't seem to like the fact its the Rams due to the history they have there, but if they approve Inglewood then it doesn't matter. I believe that's what they would prefer anyway, given Inglewood seems to be quite superior in pretty much every way, and doesn't cost the NFL anything. Gives the Chargers the ability to work in San Diego, and an out if they can't.

 

[BuiltRamTough]

What's interesting in all this is that 4-5 months ago we were wondering if LA is finally about to get an NFL team. Now the question is which team or teams will be in LA.

 

[Goose]

I guess television and video games have rotted my brain.

(1) You are correct, ESK said he want's a chance to build the brand and sponsorships for a few seasons since he's building the place. Then he's open to another team coming in. This was stated after the last meetings. But to assume that it won't go smoothly is only an opinion.

You’re right it might not be a struggle but Stan kind of seems like ___when it comes to business and the fact that he was in ligation with previous partners for so long it really doesn’t seem like he’s the type of guy that is going to just hammer this out over a couple of beers. This would be his stadium and he is going to want as much of the pie as possible including the crust. Now he may be more agreeable if it is his only way to LA but I just don’t see an agreement going well. Plus since he wants to be there for at least a season alone that means the second team will have to endure a second possible lame duck season in a less than desirable stadium. I don’t think the owner of that team is going to be happy about it.

(2) Goldman Sachs are not investing, they are helping line it up. To date nothing has been reported of who specifically would be investing anything.

Everything I have read has indicated they will finance the deal. Andy Strickland of CBS Sports radio 920 AM in St. Louis reported Friday that according to high-ranking officials in St. Louis, Chargers owner Dean Spanos has a deal in place with Goldman Sachs to build a stadium in Los Angeles, and the NFL asked him to hold off from announcing or releasing those plans (Hall 2015). Now I am not sure how they will provide the money and through what avenue but as far as the NFL goes they know the money is coming from GS. And that is all they care about. Goldman Sachs will finance the Chargers’ move from San Diego and also cover any losses sustained by the franchise in the first few years in Los Angeles, the Sports Business Journal reported Monday (Fox 5 2015). The fact that not only is GS going to finance the stadium but cover any losses is big and very telling IMO.

(3) If the Carson project doesn't deliver a solid financial plan and address the environmental issues, then how would the league approve it over Inglewood? Do you think that the owners would approve Carson and turn down Stan's solid plan if those questions aren't answered. (4) Same as 3, also the land and financing aren't done,, at least not yet.(5) Where did you read from an official source that the clean up is almost done. First off the methane and toxic dump are still there. It regenerates itself.

Well that is a lot of what ifs. I think the financing is solid. And as far as the cleanup goes according to Emad Yemut of the Toxic Substance Control Department “It is safe”. The site still needs a series of extraction wells to remove methane and other gases which can be installed in 6 months. The property, which includes an additional 11 acres outside the landfill, is already equipped with wells that pull out groundwater fouled with industrial solvents, he said. The water is then treated and piped into the sewer system (Pringle 2015). The land is as good as sold. It has not been reported that is has been finalized so I will concede that much but Fabiani has stated on many occasions that they have to sell and we have to buy. “The project is subject to a binding purchase and sale agreement,” Fabiani wrote in the email. “All parties are bound by the agreement.” When NBC 7 first reached out to Fabiani he said, the "land has been purchased through a binding agreement with the seller." (Walsh 2015). Now Walsh reported that back in February and the agreement was supposed to be finalized in March. I don’t think it has been reported one way or another if that land has been secured yet.

I think Carson could win out over Inglewood if STL comes through with a plan and the other markets don’t which looks to be the case as we sit here today. The Carson project would provide the two California teams with a solution in the California market, the Raiders and the Chargers have been working on stadium solutions much longer than the Rams, and you aren’t allowing a team to move back to LA that abandoned that market effective diluting the market while vacating another. Of course we are dealing in hypotheticals.

Reference:

Hall, Mathew T. Goldman Sachs shows Chargers are serious about sharing Carson stadium with Raiders. U-T San Diego, February 20, 2015. Retrieved from: http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/feb/20/goldman-sachs-chargers-raiders-stadium/

Fox 5. Report: Goldman Sachs offers to finance Charges move to LA. Fox 5 San Diego, March 2, 2015. Retrieved from: http://fox5sandiego.com/2015/03/02/report-goldman-sachs-offers-to-finance-chargers-move-to-la/

Pringle, Paul. State says Carson site ready for construction of NFL stadium. LA Times, February 21, 2015. Retrieved from: http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-nfl-carson-stadium-20150221-story.html

Walsh, Lynn. Chargers Carson Stadium Land Purchase Not Finalized. NBC San Diego, February 20, 2015. Retrieved from: http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/loc...um-Land-Purchase-Not-Finalized-293108931.html

 

[blue4]

I guess television and video game have rotted my brain.



You’re right it might not be a struggle but Stan kind of seems like a D-Bag when it comes to business and the fact that he was in ligation with previous partners for so long it really doesn’t seem like he’s the type of guy that is going to just hammer this out over a couple of beers. This would be his stadium and he is going to want as much of the pie as possible including the crust. Now he may be more agreeable if it is his only way to LA but I just don’t see an agreement going well. Plus since he wants to be there for at least a season alone that means the second team will have to endure a second possible lame duck season in a less than desirable stadium. I don’t think the owner of that team is going to be happy about it.



Everything I have read has indicated they will finance the deal. Andy Strickland of CBS Sports radio 920 AM in St. Louis reported Friday that according to high-ranking officials in St. Louis, Chargers owner Dean Spanos has a deal in place with Goldman Sachs to build a stadium in Los Angeles, and the NFL asked him to hold off from announcing or releasing those plans (Hall 2015). Now I am not sure how they will provide the money and through what avenue but as far as the NFL goes they know the money is coming from GS. And that is all they care about. Goldman Sachs will finance the Chargers’ move from San Diego and also cover any losses sustained by the franchise in the first few years in Los Angeles, the Sports Business Journal reported Monday (Fox 5 2015). The fact that not only is GS going to finance the stadium but cover any losses is big and very telling IMO.



Well that is a lot of what ifs. I think the financing is solid. And as far as the cleanup goes according to Emad Yemut of the Toxic Substance Control Department “It is safe”. The site still needs a series of extraction wells to remove methane and other gases which can be installed in 6 months. The property, which includes an additional 11 acres outside the landfill, is already equipped with wells that pull out groundwater fouled with industrial solvents, he said. The water is then treated and piped into the sewer system (Pringle 2015). The land is as good as sold. It has not been reported that is has been finalized so I will concede that much but Fabiani has stated on many occasions that they have to sell and we have to buy. “The project is subject to a binding purchase and sale agreement,” Fabiani wrote in the email. “All parties are bound by the agreement.” When NBC 7 first reached out to Fabiani he said, the "land has been purchased through a binding agreement with the seller." (Walsh 2015). Now Walsh reported that back in February and the agreement was supposed to be finalized in March. I don’t think it has been reported one way or another if that land has been secured yet.

I think Carson could win out over Inglewood if STL comes through with a plan and the other markets don’t which looks to be the case as we sit here today. The Carson project would provide the two California teams with a solution in the California market, the Raiders and the Chargers have been working on stadium solutions much longer than the Rams, and you aren’t allowing a team to move back to LA that abandoned that market effective diluting the market while vacating another. Of course we are dealing in hypotheticals.

Reference:

Hall, Mathew T. Goldman Sachs shows Chargers are serious about sharing Carson stadium with Raiders. U-T San Diego, February 20, 2015. Retrieved from: http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/feb/20/goldman-sachs-chargers-raiders-stadium/

Fox 5. Report: Goldman Sachs offers to finance Charges move to LA. Fox 5 San Diego, March 2, 2015. Retrieved from: http://fox5sandiego.com/2015/03/02/report-goldman-sachs-offers-to-finance-chargers-move-to-la/

Pringle, Paul. State says Carson site ready for construction of NFL stadium. LA Times, February 21, 2015. Retrieved from: http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-nfl-carson-stadium-20150221-story.html

Walsh, Lynn. Chargers Carson Stadium Land Purchase Not Finalized. NBC San Diego, February 20, 2015. Retrieved from: http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/loc...um-Land-Purchase-Not-Finalized-293108931.html

Excellent post. And the reference section gives it quite the "no bullshit here" gravitas!

Anyone else notice billionaires seem to move like turtles? They're all in a rush to declare and piss off the fan base, but piddlefart like Grandma Moses when putting the rubber to the road. This is why I would not succeed in the boardroom.

 

[Sum1]

Brother Goose, what happened here? (1) You are correct, ESK said he want's a chance to build the brand and sponsorships for a few seasons since he's building the place. Then he's open to another team coming in. This was stated after the last meetings. But to assume that it won't go smoothly is only an opinion. (2) Goldman Sachs are not investing, they are helping line it up. To date nothing has been reported of who specifically would be investing anything. (3) If the Carson project doesn't deliver a solid financial plan and address the environmental issues, then how would the league approve it over Inglewood? Do you think that the owners would approve Carson and turn down Stan's solid plan if those questions aren't answered. (4) Same as 3, also the land and financing aren't done,, at least not yet. (5) Where did you read from an official source that the clean up is almost done. First off the methane and toxic dump are still there. It regenerates itself. Liquefaction and oil sludge are common in that area too. I live near by and that part of LA sucks. (6) Perhaps it will be, but you can't see a reason? (7) This is the comment that got me to reply. The Rams were in LA when the divisions we set up (save the last realignment where they remained in the west). The Rams are in the NFC west where LA is. Conference re alignment is a huge deal Rambro. Chargers, Raiders, Broncos and KC have all been in the same division over 45 years. They were in the AFL west before the merger. Breaking them up is insanity. The Rams have been in the NFC for 75+ years and moving them is blasphemy. Moving them to where they played for 48 seasons is the least change of any scenario beside no change at all. Except to the fine fans of StL of course.

Goldman Sachs is going to finance that stadium is the way I understand it. They are going to front the money and make it back through the same ways that Levi Stadium was done.

 

[BuiltRamTough]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levi's_Stadium
In December 2011, the Santa Clara City Council voted for an agreement that calls for the city’s Stadium Authority to borrow $850,000,000 from Goldman Sachs, Bank of America and U.S. Bank. This will cover most of the construction costs, with the remainder to be made up via funding from the NFL, a hotel tax and city redevelopment funds. Interest, fees and terms for this loan have not been disclosed.[61][62] The $850,000,000 building loan, plus interest and fees will be assumed by the City's Stadium Authority, where additional interest and fees will be applied. On February 2, 2012, NFL owners approved a loan to the 49ers of $200,000,000, for use in constructing the new stadium, and to be taken from a new G-4 stadium loan fund.[63] Terms of the loan were not specified, but under the previous G-3 plan, money was repaid directly into the league's account from the borrowing team's share of gate receipts from road games.

 

[BuiltRamTough]

I wonder if Goldman Sachs is also going to buy the land and cover the G4 loan portion and the relocation fee.

 

[dbrooks25]

I guess television and video games have rotted my brain.



You’re right it might not be a struggle but Stan kind of seems like a D-Bag when it comes to business and the fact that he was in ligation with previous partners for so long it really doesn’t seem like he’s the type of guy that is going to just hammer this out over a couple of beers. This would be his stadium and he is going to want as much of the pie as possible including the crust. Now he may be more agreeable if it is his only way to LA but I just don’t see an agreement going well. Plus since he wants to be there for at least a season alone that means the second team will have to endure a second possible lame duck season in a less than desirable stadium. I don’t think the owner of that team is going to be happy about it.



Everything I have read has indicated they will finance the deal. Andy Strickland of CBS Sports radio 920 AM in St. Louis reported Friday that according to high-ranking officials in St. Louis, Chargers owner Dean Spanos has a deal in place with Goldman Sachs to build a stadium in Los Angeles, and the NFL asked him to hold off from announcing or releasing those plans (Hall 2015). Now I am not sure how they will provide the money and through what avenue but as far as the NFL goes they know the money is coming from GS. And that is all they care about. Goldman Sachs will finance the Chargers’ move from San Diego and also cover any losses sustained by the franchise in the first few years in Los Angeles, the Sports Business Journal reported Monday (Fox 5 2015). The fact that not only is GS going to finance the stadium but cover any losses is big and very telling IMO.



Well that is a lot of what ifs. I think the financing is solid. And as far as the cleanup goes according to Emad Yemut of the Toxic Substance Control Department “It is safe”. The site still needs a series of extraction wells to remove methane and other gases which can be installed in 6 months. The property, which includes an additional 11 acres outside the landfill, is already equipped with wells that pull out groundwater fouled with industrial solvents, he said. The water is then treated and piped into the sewer system (Pringle 2015). The land is as good as sold. It has not been reported that is has been finalized so I will concede that much but Fabiani has stated on many occasions that they have to sell and we have to buy. “The project is subject to a binding purchase and sale agreement,” Fabiani wrote in the email. “All parties are bound by the agreement.” When NBC 7 first reached out to Fabiani he said, the "land has been purchased through a binding agreement with the seller." (Walsh 2015). Now Walsh reported that back in February and the agreement was supposed to be finalized in March. I don’t think it has been reported one way or another if that land has been secured yet.

I think Carson could win out over Inglewood if STL comes through with a plan and the other markets don’t which looks to be the case as we sit here today. The Carson project would provide the two California teams with a solution in the California market, the Raiders and the Chargers have been working on stadium solutions much longer than the Rams, and you aren’t allowing a team to move back to LA that abandoned that market effective diluting the market while vacating another. Of course we are dealing in hypotheticals.

Reference:

Hall, Mathew T. Goldman Sachs shows Chargers are serious about sharing Carson stadium with Raiders. U-T San Diego, February 20, 2015. Retrieved from: http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/feb/20/goldman-sachs-chargers-raiders-stadium/

Fox 5. Report: Goldman Sachs offers to finance Charges move to LA. Fox 5 San Diego, March 2, 2015. Retrieved from: http://fox5sandiego.com/2015/03/02/report-goldman-sachs-offers-to-finance-chargers-move-to-la/

Pringle, Paul. State says Carson site ready for construction of NFL stadium. LA Times, February 21, 2015. Retrieved from: http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-nfl-carson-stadium-20150221-story.html

Walsh, Lynn. Chargers Carson Stadium Land Purchase Not Finalized. NBC San Diego, February 20, 2015. Retrieved from: http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/loc...um-Land-Purchase-Not-Finalized-293108931.html

Very informative, detailed post with references to boot. Nice job, Goose.

 

[bluecoconuts]

I think people are seeing 'financing" and "loaning" as the same thing, and that's where they're seeing things wrong. Goldman Sachs will help get financing in order, they'll loan some money out, and then take it back. The projections need to come out at least close, otherwise they won't just hand over 2 billion dollars. They're loaning it out and making a ton from interest, taking a nice cut.

One of the articles was posted back in February of 2015, and since then the "deal" has been announced, its the same one we're familiar with, Goldman Sachs is going to help secure the financing in Carson.

 

[Sum1]

What's interesting in all this is that 4-5 months ago we were wondering if LA is finally about to get an NFL team. Now the question is which team or teams will be in LA.

Though I think it's more than just a safe bet that one or two of these teams is in LA soon...would anybody really be surprised if this is just the latest glimmer of LA hope that falls through?

I certainly want the Rams to stay in St. Louis, but I feel for the LA football fans with all the false hope over the years so I wouldn't want this to be another example...but I wouldn't totally dismiss that from happening either.