New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[bluecoconuts]

If he decides to stay, I wouldn't have a problem with him. Hey! St Louis get's the stadium(not stan), improves a blighted area, and keeps the rams. I would take that. In the end, if Kroenke maintains ownership and keeps the rams here, he is "choosing" ST Louis. Because if he REALLY REALLY wants LA, he can probably lawyer up and get it.

I've personally liked his ownership style, right up to you know, when he bought some town named inglewood.

What. If he refuses to pay for the riverfront stadium?

 

[beej]

What. If he refuses to pay for the riverfront stadium?

if he refuses to pay for the riverfront stadium there IS no riverfront stadium. I think that Peacock has already said that it can't be built without owner contribution.

 

[RamzFanz]

If he decides to stay, I wouldn't have a problem with him. Hey! St Louis get's the stadium(not stan), improves a blighted area, and keeps the rams. I would take that. In the end, if Kroenke maintains ownership and keeps the rams here, he is "choosing" ST Louis. Because if he REALLY REALLY wants LA, he can probably lawyer up and get it.

I've personally liked his ownership style, right up to you know, when he bought some town named inglewood.

Yes, the Rams being here will be nice, I have no problem with a new stadium as I hate the dome, and that land is a waste land. But he is funding the development in LA and forcing us to pony up here. It's a brilliant win-win financial move by him but his legacy will be love of money, not of the game.

 

[MrMotes]

If the Rams stay in St. Louis playing in a brand new riverfront stadium, Stan's hardball tactics will have accomplished that and he'll be more than forgiven, he'll be revered.

If he moves to L.A. and 20 years later (if he's still alive and in control) leaves for a big payday, L.A. will hate him then. But until then, he'll be a hero for bringing the Rams back to L.A.

Now if he tries to move and the NFL stops him, he sues, the team languishes, well that would be a scenario where he wouldn't be getting a lot of love...

 

[beej]

If the Rams stay in St. Louis playing in a brand new riverfront stadium, Stan's hardball tactics will have accomplished that and he'll be more than forgiven, he'll be revered.

If he moves to L.A. and 20 years later (if he's still alive and in control) leaves for a big payday, L.A. will hate him then. But until then, he'll be a hero for bringing the Rams back to L.A.

Now if he tries to move and the NFL stops him, he sues, the team languishes, well that would be a scenario where he wouldn't be getting a lot of love...

agreed. and if his team plays for the next 10 years like it did here the last 10 years, they may try and shut him down for taking up too much water.

 

[RamFan503]

What. If he refuses to pay for the riverfront stadium?

I think what beej is saying is that if he keeps the team here, he is choosing to stay and that would include choosing to chip in on the stadium.

 

[bluecoconuts]

I think what beej is saying is that if he keeps the team here, he is choosing to stay and that would include choosing to chip in on the stadium.

I know, I was just messing with him. On my phone and too lazy to pull out the blue font

 

[MrMotes]

I know, I was just messing with him. On my phone and too lazy to pull out the blue font

Well if Stan were to stay against his will, he might do that and maybe just keep playing in the dome...

 

[beej]

Well if Stan were to stay against his will, he might do that and maybe just keep playing in the dome...

OK were you too lazy for the blue font too?

 

[D L]

if he refuses to pay for the riverfront stadium there IS no riverfront stadium. I think that Peacock has already said that it can't be built without owner contribution.

Which is why I'm skeptical of the Raiders possibly moving here. Davis would have to pay a relocation fee plus 450 mil for the riverfront project.

 

[MrMotes]

OK were you too lazy for the blue font too?

I have to admit i'm old and don't like the blue font or smilies very much, but no, i was serious.

I don't think it's a very likely scenario, but if Kroenke were forced to stay in St. Louis against his will, they could end up staying in the dome until that situation was worked out.

 

[MrMotes]

Which is why I'm skeptical of the Raiders possibly moving here. Davis would have to pay a relocation fee plus 450 mil for the riverfront project.

Unless the league really wanted the Raiders to move to St. Louis, then i think they'd find the move very affordable...

 

[blue4]

If the raiders move here it will be with help from the NFL. He simply doesn't have the money, unless his shareholders kick in from their own money. The NFL will have to view it as an investment.

 

[Hacksaw]

If the raiders move here it will be with help from the NFL. He simply doesn't have the money, unless his shareholders kick in from their own money. The NFL will have to view it as an investment.

He doesn't have the jack. The league would probably have to waive/greatly diminish the relocation fee and stick it to Kroenke to make up for it. The owners 'investment' would be in the way of the G4. Peacock is trying to do the rest with the exception of the $200+ million required by the owner. That become the approximate target number in this scenario...

 

[dbrooks25]

What. If he refuses to pay for the riverfront stadium?

Then his ass will have to stay in the EJD or wherever in Stl.

 

[Hacksaw]

Ha Ha.. This is like a bunch of kids on Saturday at the park getting together for some sandlot football and waiting to see who the captains (the guys who brought the ball) are going to pick first. Looking cool but dreading being the last guy picked.

I always brought the ball. lol

 

[blue4]

He doesn't have the jack. The league would probably have to waive/greatly diminish the relocation fee and stick it to Kroenke to make up for it. The owners 'investment' would be in the way of the G4. Peacock is trying to do the rest with the exception of the $200+ million required by the owner. That become the approximate target number in this scenario...

He's claimed willingness to go 500 mil before. The NFL would have to almost totally waive the fee.

Or they could stick it to Kroenke like you said. He's the reason four towns are in this mess so he should take it in the shorts insuring this town has a football team.



Grumble.

 

[The Ripper]

He's claimed willingness to go 500 mil before. The NFL would have to almost totally waive the fee.

Or they could stick it to Kroenke like you said. He's the reason four towns are in this mess so he should take it in the shorts insuring this town has a football team.



Grumble.

Different markets so the relocation fee would be different but if the Raiders did have to move the relocation fee would be minimal to almost non-existent. Not really sticking it to Kroenke but it would probably similar to what happened when the Rams moved last time and they had to pay off the debt in Anaheim as part of the relocation agreement.

 

[Goose]

Mo. Senator on Stadium: ‘I’m going to be a wall’
May 7, 2015 9:28 AM

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (KMOX) — Missouri State Senator Rob Schaaf (R-St. Joseph) has been a vocal opponent of Missouri Governor Jay Nixon’s plan to issue bonds to help pay for a new NFL stadium on the north St. Louis riverfront.

Schaaf says as long as his “legs will stand up,” he’ll filibuster. He called it a sign of disrespect that the governor would try to issue bonds without the approval legislature or the people of Missouri.

“If they try to go around the legislature and build a new stadium in St. Louis, I’m here,” Schaff says. “I’m going to be a wall.”

Schaff added he’s not going to let Nixon, “get away with it.”

http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2015/05/07/mo-senator-on-stadium-im-a-wall/

 

[Goose]

If Nixon can extend the bonds without a vote then how can this guy filibuster? What am I missing?