New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[ChrisW]

Yeah, they have to say that. All they're doing is restating the rules that everybody already knows. St Louis can tell everyone that they just need 8 owners to vote no and then maybe the Rams will stay (assuming Stan wouldn't just move them anyway), but the problem is getting those 8 owners. Assuming that the big names like Jerry Jones, and Robert Kraft are going to side with Stan in the event of a move (given they both have said repeatedly they want a team in LA, you would expect them to vote "Yes"), as well as the NFC West, and several other teams who may want to get in on the market if it's open (Colts, Chiefs, Titans and possibly even Bears) who is going to vote no other than Alex Spanos? He's going to have one hell of a time convincing the other owners over the guys who do want a team in LA. And he's going to have to do a better job than "Well maybe I want to move there one day" or "Well I don't want a team there because it hurts my leverage!"

I don't count on the NFL owners voting no, because one, I have no faith in the NFL owners not siding with an owner, and two I don't see the other 7 votes necessary to block a move anyway. If Stan is well liked or not, it wont really matter, because there's other big guys pushing it, and above all else, money talks.

They have to say that? That's what's going to have to happen. There are plenty of owners who might vote no. All those guys that followed the by-laws and ended up with a new stadium instead of doing what Kroenke wants to do (increase the value of his franchise, which in-itself is against the by-laws).

The NFL has always stood behind the host city. It's only the owner that has either sued or threatened to sue that is the reason a move happened. The by-laws have been tightened since this happened to make it much harder for that to happen again.

 

[RamFan503]

Not the Rams? If the Rams move to the UK will u still not be a fan? I dont get it, a true fan will support there team no matter where they go like ive been whem they moved to St. Louis

I don't think that is a fair assessment Nate. You and I and many others may have followed the Rams to St Louis but there is absolutely nothing wrong with supporting your city or community and thus whatever team plays THERE. I used to follow USC when I lived in LA but when I moved to Oregon, I started rooting for the Oregon teams. Now I am a much bigger Rams fan than I was a USC fan so it was just a decision I made. I moved to Portland and stayed a Lakers fan.

Bottom line is that fans are fans for their own particular reasons. And if I lived in St Louis and an owner moved a team out of my city for the 2nd time in 20 years, I'd probably be a little bent as well. We have a lot of former Cards fans on this forum and I'm guessing there are a lot of them in St Louis that transferred their allegiance to the Rams when they moved there. For them it is about the home town team. I think that is just as cool if maybe not even a little more than following a team as it jumps cities.

Just my two cents. But if the Rams leave St Louis, I hope most fans from St Louis stick with them, and I totally get it if they don't.

 

[Username]

Leaning on the by-laws to keep the Rams seems foolish to me. Why would you count on the NFL not siding with the owner?

What else do they have though if Kroenke is dead set on moving? I think more or less he's just assuring people that they're doing everything in their power to show the league that it's ridiculous for St. Louis to not be a NFL city. In the end Stan and the owners will obviously just do whatever they like though as you've alluded to. That's the way it has been and always will be, nothing will change on that front. I still don't see any reason to lay down on issues regarding the league and the by-laws though.

Yeah, because all the big name owners who have been pushing for an LA team will say no just so the Chargers owner can sit around and continue to fail to gain leverage with the city being open. Fat chance, who did Florio talk to, the towel boy

I love how he just starts out his article with an erroneous statement that Stan himself has said anything. So dramatically too. "Stan Kroenke broke years of silence." Hahahahahahaaaha. Shut the **** up dude, Jesus.

 

[beej]

it seems like we've discussed this issue to death. What's next? anybody know when we hear something new?

 

[ChrisW]

it seems like we've discussed this issue to death. What's next? anybody know when we hear something new?

My guess is around Super Bowl weekend. Stan has a propensity of making big announcements the week of.

 

[Mojo Ram]

I moved to Portland and stayed a Lakers fan.

 

[bluecoconuts]

They have to say that? That's what's going to have to happen. There are plenty of owners who might vote no. All those guys that followed the by-laws and ended up with a new stadium instead of doing what Kroenke wants to do (increase the value of his franchise, which in-itself is against the by-laws).

The NFL has always stood behind the host city. It's only the owner that has either sued or threatened to sue that is the reason a move happened. The by-laws have been tightened since this happened to make it much harder for that to happen again.

You mean a vote is going to happen? Yeah, if he files there will be a vote, or that they will vote no? Because I have serious doubt's. NFL needed to make those bylaws because it gives fans peace of mind, which in turn makes them more willing to spend money, which generates revenue. They don't need to sit there and strictly enforce all the bylaws though, its really up to them to even determine if they have been violated. Just because St Louis makes a proposal doesn't mean that Stan has to stay if he doesn't want to. If they don't make one that he likes he can just say it didn't happen and file. St Louis couldn't live up to the terms of the lease, didn't agree to the pitch the Rams made to get them up to terms, and then lost in arbitration. Stan already has enough to leave right there. As fans we may believe that they haven't exhausted all options, but its not up to us to vote, it's the owners. The NFL will do what they feel is best for the NFL. The NFL has already stated they want a team in LA, meaning they believe its good for the NFL. They also said they're not big expansion, so they're okay with relocation of a team. A team to LA has been in the works since before Stan took over the Rams, so why on earth would they vote to block it. Other than the Chargers which team stands to benefit from the Rams not moving? I just don't think they're going to vote no out of the goodness of their hearts, and I don't really see who would be motivated to vote no, again other than the Chargers and maybe Raiders.

What else do they have though if Kroenke is dead set on moving? I think more or less he's just assuring people that they're doing everything in their power to show the league that it's ridiculous for St. Louis to not be a NFL city. In the end Stan and the owners will obviously just do whatever they like though as you've alluded to. That's the way it has been and always will be, nothing will change on that front. I still don't see any reason to lay down on issues regarding the league and the by-laws though.

If he's dead set on leaving I'm not sure what they can do. Offering a real viable solution would be a start though. The problem is making it realistic for him to consider without breaking the bank and being impossible to live up to those terms to put them back in the same situation again. There are questions to how possible that is as well. I don't envy the city officials working on the project that's for sure. Right now they need to do more than hope that either Stan isn't serious or that the NFL will block the move and really fight him on the issue.

 

[STL-Rams]

http://www.insidestl.com/insideSTLc...-Ready-to-Fight-to-Keep-Rams-in-St-Louis.aspx

Peacock and Company Ready to Fight to Keep Rams in St. Louis
Shane Gray

If there was ever any question as to whether or not Dave Peacock and company were first focused on keeping St. Louis an NFL city specifically by retaining the Rams rather than in attempting to acquire another franchise, those doubts should have been laid to rest by the former Anheuser-Busch President during last Friday's stadium proposal unveiling.

In essence, Peacock drew a line in the sand and took off the gloves in saying that we are ready to "fight for what is rightfully ours."

While addressing the St. Louis Rams at one point in the presser, Peacock spoke with what was arguably a greater fervency and conviction than he did at any other time during the proposal's revealing.

"This is not about the owner of the Rams," Peacock asserted, in referencing Stan Kroenke. "The Rams are our team. This is St. Louis' team. Owners own the franchise but the fan base and the popularity and the passion behind that team is owned by the fan base. This is our team."

On multiple other occasions, Peacock also referred to the Rams as being St. Louis' team. It is highly unlikely that this was done without specific intent.

Earlier in the presser, attorney Bob Blitz -- the counterpart to Peacock in Governor Jay Nixon's two man task force -- made some interesting comments about former St. Louis football Cardinals owner Bill Bidwell while seemingly drawing a parallel to Kroenke.

"The citizens of St. Louis didn't like the owner, the reclusive Mr. Bill Bidwell," Blitz said.

Of course, reclusive is a word often used when one mentions or thinks of "Silent" Stan. Blitz added that ultimately Bidwell and the Big Red left after being welcomed to Arizona.

The message that seemingly was being sent here: don't let any possible ill feelings towards Kroenke impact what should be jaw-clenched efforts to ensure that the Rams and the NFL remain in the Gateway City.

It is interesting to note, coincidentally or not, that Mayor Francis Slay's Chief of Staff Jeff Rainford made mention of a myriad of possibilities regarding the Rams and the NFL's future in St. Louis during multiple interviews last week, with one idea being shared that alluded to the thought of another individual/group potentially owning the organization at some point.

But how would a scenario develop that could see a different ownership group in possession of the St. Louis Rams?

(I hope each of you will enjoy the full column below with much, much more on the topic. Thanks for being the best Rams board anywhere! Hope each of you here are doing well):

http://www.insidestl.com/insideSTLc...-Ready-to-Fight-to-Keep-Rams-in-St-Louis.aspx

 

[Prime Time]

it seems like we've discussed this issue to death. What's next? anybody know when we hear something new?

January 28th is when the lease on the stadium goes year to year. Someone correct me if I'm wrong on this date.

 

[Username]

If he's dead set on leaving I'm not sure what they can do. Offering a real viable solution would be a start though. The problem is making it realistic for him to consider without breaking the bank and being impossible to live up to those terms to put them back in the same situation again. There are questions to how possible that is as well. I don't envy the city officials working on the project that's for sure. Right now they need to do more than hope that either Stan isn't serious or that the NFL will block the move and really fight him on the issue.

You're assuming they're not man? They are ready to talk. It's time for Kroenke and his people to actually show up and begin a discussion if they really want to stay.

 

[duckhunter]

C'mon Stan, get ya some.

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/19...42_1_antitrust-laws-antitrust-case-tagliablue

 

[bluecoconuts]

You're assuming they're not man? They are ready to talk. It's time for Kroenke and his people to actually show up and begin a discussion if they really want to stay.

Kroenke has sent his people though. Just not himself personally. The stadium proposal wasn't anything near what he asked for, and has a lot of issues in terms of size, parking, and financing. The presser was filled with shots towards the ownership, and hints of potentially taking the team from him.

I'm interested in seeing the response, but I expect the Rams move to year to year and I wouldn't be shocked if instead of a counter he just says "try again"... Comparing this situation to the Chargers and hoping the league will agree that the Rams haven't exhausted all options isn't good because its not a good comparison. The chargers arent serious about moving. Simply making a proposal isn't enough, it needs to be good enough that to walk away from would be insane. If he doesn't agree and its not even close, then he can say the city can't do it. It falls back on if the owners would actually try and block or not. I don't see them doing that unless the offer is that good.

 

[RamFan503]

C'mon Stan, get ya some.

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1995-11-30/news/1995334142_1_antitrust-laws-antitrust-case-tagliablue

Anyone have any idea if anything has changed since this time and if so - what? My understanding is that the NFL has tightened up things but I don't know specifically what those would be. But I could see a real reluctance to block a move if the NFL might be on the hook for triple damages. If Georgia and Shaw threatened to sue for $2.2 billion, what number would they be looking at if Stan sued? Yikes! I mean - let's just say that the franchise would allegedly be worth $1.5 billion more as some reports say. We're talking a $4.5 billion just in franchise worth alone. I can't imagine Georgia and Shaw were trying to say the Rams would be worth $730 million MORE by moving them to St Louis so what other things would be considered in the triple damages?

I will say one thing. If the Rams end up staying in St Louis, it appears to me that it is ONLY because Stan wanted to stay in reality and was just trying to get the best deal he could. Because from what I'm seeing, it seems that the NFL would be relatively powerless to stop him.

If I'm right in this, I REALLY hope Stan keepsthe team in St Louis because IMO that speaks louder than any way he could ever say, "I want to stay in my home state."

 

[RamFan503]

Kroenke has sent his people though. Just not himself personally.

I'd add that Goodell wasn't there either. So I don't know how much stock I would put in all this supposed lack of personal involvement by Stan - one way or the other.

 

[RamFan503]

http://www.insidestl.com/insideSTLc...-Ready-to-Fight-to-Keep-Rams-in-St-Louis.aspx

Peacock and Company Ready to Fight to Keep Rams in St. Louis
Shane Gray

If there was ever any question as to whether or not Dave Peacock and company were first focused on keeping St. Louis an NFL city specifically by retaining the Rams rather than in attempting to acquire another franchise, those doubts should have been laid to rest by the former Anheuser-Busch President during last Friday's stadium proposal unveiling.

In essence, Peacock drew a line in the sand and took off the gloves in saying that we are ready to "fight for what is rightfully ours."

While addressing the St. Louis Rams at one point in the presser, Peacock spoke with what was arguably a greater fervency and conviction than he did at any other time during the proposal's revealing.

"This is not about the owner of the Rams," Peacock asserted, in referencing Stan Kroenke. "The Rams are our team. This is St. Louis' team. Owners own the franchise but the fan base and the popularity and the passion behind that team is owned by the fan base. This is our team."

On multiple other occasions, Peacock also referred to the Rams as being St. Louis' team. It is highly unlikely that this was done without specific intent.

Earlier in the presser, attorney Bob Blitz -- the counterpart to Peacock in Governor Jay Nixon's two man task force -- made some interesting comments about former St. Louis football Cardinals owner Bill Bidwell while seemingly drawing a parallel to Kroenke.

"The citizens of St. Louis didn't like the owner, the reclusive Mr. Bill Bidwell," Blitz said.

Of course, reclusive is a word often used when one mentions or thinks of "Silent" Stan. Blitz added that ultimately Bidwell and the Big Red left after being welcomed to Arizona.

The message that seemingly was being sent here: don't let any possible ill feelings towards Kroenke impact what should be jaw-clenched efforts to ensure that the Rams and the NFL remain in the Gateway City.

It is interesting to note, coincidentally or not, that Mayor Francis Slay's Chief of Staff Jeff Rainford made mention of a myriad of possibilities regarding the Rams and the NFL's future in St. Louis during multiple interviews last week, with one idea being shared that alluded to the thought of another individual/group potentially owning the organization at some point.

But how would a scenario develop that could see a different ownership group in possession of the St. Louis Rams?

(I hope each of you will enjoy the full column below with much, much more on the topic. Thanks for being the best Rams board anywhere! Hope each of you here are doing well):

http://www.insidestl.com/insideSTLc...-Ready-to-Fight-to-Keep-Rams-in-St-Louis.aspx

Shane:

Great article as usual.

We keep hearing about how the league has tightened bylaws since the moves in the 90's. Do you know specifically what has been changed? I'm trying to figure out what the changes were and how much power they carry. Apparently the league was lobbying Congress to pass new anti-trust regulations for the NFL to allow them to block moves without league approval. Do you know if any of that got done?

Stu

 

[Selassie I]

I'm gonna weigh in on this now.

I have always hated the divide that has been driven down the middle of this fan base. It's a very weird dynamic that Ram Fans like us have had to deal with.

I respect all of the different feelings that all of you are feeling. I wish we didn't have to deal with it.

 

[RamFan503]

I'm gonna weigh in on this now.

I have always hated the divide that has been driven down the middle of this fan base. It's a very weird dynamic that Ram Fans like us have had to deal with.

I respect all of the different feelings that all of you are feeling. I wish we didn't have to deal with it.

^^^This

 

[Dodgersrf]

January 28th is when the lease on the stadium goes year to year. Someone correct me if I'm wrong on this date.

This is what I've read as well.

 

[RamBill]

Janoris Jenkins not a fan of open-air proposal
By Nick Wagoner

http://espn.go.com/blog/st-louis-rams/post/_/id/15364/janoris-jenkins-not-a-fan-of-open-air-proposal

EARTH CITY, Mo. -- As a native of Pahokee, Florida, it stands to reason that St. Louis Rams cornerback Janoris Jenkins isn't a fan of playing football in the cold.

Jenkins played his high school ball at Pahokee High and chose the University of Florida for college ball. Even after transferring, Jenkins went to North Alabama. Suffice to say, Jenkins doesn't like the idea of playing outside unless it's in a warm-weather climate.

So while nearly the entire Rams organization was silent on social media during the reveal of the St. Louis stadium plan on Friday, Jenkins had no problem voicing his thoughts on the open-air proposal.


As you'd expect, those tweets weren't received too kindly by St. Louis fans or those in the Rams organization. Rams players received a text during the proceedings asking them not to tweet about the stadium proposal or matters relating to it.

Of course, Jenkins also clearly didn't realize that a new open-air stadium in St. Louis has nothing to do with what happens in 2015. Or 2016. Or any year between now and 2020, when the St. Louis stadium proposal is expected to be finished.

Jenkins is actually scheduled to be an unrestricted free agent after next season, so if he's truly upset about the idea of playing outdoors in a cold-weather city, he'll be able to factor that in to his decision.

 

[Dodgersrf]

Trade JJ to GB for Rodgers.