New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[blue4]

I wouldn't know him from Adam, but he's the guy who shut down Silveys attempt to get that bill into the new budget. So he may have helped you guys get the funding situation resolved. That seems significant in and of itself.

I guarantee that had nothing to do with doing right by the city of St Louis. Let's just say there are things going on in that legislature that I find completely unacceptable and even passing stadium financing would really not change my low opinion of them.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Now he is saying what Peacock was saying. This is either a very bold assumption or perhaps there is something going on behind the scenes we aren't privy to.

If I had to guess it's a bold assumption with a little bit of wishful thinking thrown in. That's mostly due to the fact that only St Louis media/Peacock seem to be pushing that story. If it had legs, national media guys would almost assuredly be on the story, because it's a big deal.

 

[den-the-coach]

If I had to guess it's a bold assumption with a little bit of wishful thinking thrown in. That's mostly due to the fact that only St Louis media/Peacock seem to be pushing that story. If it had legs, national media guys would almost assuredly be on the story, because it's a big deal.

You're right on point and I'm shocked it's being brought up. Just keep making headway with the stadium so the NFL is going to force an owner to sell so a team stays in a city?

Many report Kroenke won't go rogue and challenge the NFL, but they are going to convince him to sell, swap or wait on expansion? Again I like it better when Peacock focuses on the Stadium project and not the semantics surrounding the Rams.

That being posted personally I would love Peacock running the Rams, but that's JMHO.

 

[rhinobean]

Good riddance. His proudest accomplishment is gerrymandering? Don't let the door knock you on your ass on the way out. Missouri should be exhibit A on the perils of having one party control too much.

Wisconsin's running a close race with MO and KS on how to screw up their constituents! People need to vvote their own self interests rather than a party line!

 

[den-the-coach]

People need to vote their own self interests rather than a party line!

Some politicians use to pass legislation for the good of the country (years ago) now everything is for the good of the party regardless how ludicrous the issue. It's not only the people that need to vote for what is right and what is just.

 

[blue4]

If I had to guess it's a bold assumption with a little bit of wishful thinking thrown in. That's mostly due to the fact that only St Louis media/Peacock seem to be pushing that story. If it had legs, national media guys would almost assuredly be on the story, because it's a big deal.

Well, you're not going to find any LA media pushing that story. And the rest of the media probably doesn't care to much. It's probably being filed under "could be" like every other story going around right now.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Well, you're not going to find any LA media pushing that story. And the rest of the media probably doesn't care to much. It's probably being filed under "could be" like every other story going around right now.

I don't think that's necessarily true, if there was real talk around the league then I think national media would talk about it. A potential owner change is a pretty big story, and it's definitely their job to care. The LA Times is a big enough paper, I wouldn't expect them to cherry pick things like that, however they tend to avoid rumors, so that would explain Sam Farmer not saying anything in an article, but I'd expect to hear more. Honestly I don't think I've heard anyone other than St Louis beat writers and Peacock suggest that was even a possibility.

That being posted personally I would love Peacock running the Rams, but that's JMHO.

Honestly, I don't think I would. Owners don't usually make personnel decisions, and when they do it doesn't usually work out well (Jerry Jones anyone?), and Peacock wont have the deep pockets that Kroenke has, which means a much lower internal salary cap.

 

[iced]

If I had to guess it's a bold assumption with a little bit of wishful thinking thrown in. That's mostly due to the fact that only St Louis media/Peacock seem to be pushing that story. If it had legs, national media guys would almost assuredly be on the story, because it's a big deal.

in the same token the national media also has hardly pushed any type of Pro-St.Louis stories, particularly early on with the first renderings.

 

[bluecoconuts]

in the same token the national media also has hardly pushed any type of Pro-St.Louis stories, particularly early on with the first renderings.

I think most believe the Rams are more likely to move than not. A football team moving to LA is more of a national story than a football team getting a new stadium in their home market. Most of the US probably doesn't give two shits about it what happens to the Rams.

 

[iced]

I think most believe the Rams are more likely to move than not. A football team moving to LA is more of a national story than a football team getting a new stadium in their home market. Most of the US probably doesn't give two shits about it what happens to the Rams.

Except in the time frame I'll talking about, there was no knowns. I mean hell look where you have to go to get all your information on what St.Louis is doing - if ain't it from someone in the city it's hardly being published

 

[bluecoconuts]

Except in the time frame I'll talking about, there was no knowns. I mean hell look where you have to go to get all your information on what St.Louis is doing - if ain't it from someone in the city it's hardly being published

Again that falls under people not caring. The story of St Louis working to get a new stadium isn't nearly as big as the story of football coming back to the second largest city. They don't report about San Diego or Oakland either, but Carson will get a few sentences.

 

[DthOn2Legs]

Now he is saying what Peacock was saying. This is either a very bold assumption or perhaps there is something going on behind the scenes we aren't privy to.

Nor is Shane. This is, IMO, the least likely scenario. No NFL teams are for sale for Stan to "trade" for.

 

[iced]

Again that falls under people not caring. The story of St Louis working to get a new stadium isn't nearly as big as the story of football coming back to the second largest city. They don't report about San Diego or Oakland either, but Carson will get a few sentences.

I agree - drama sells clicks.

But you can't easily dismiss something because it doesn't have legs coming from St.Louis when they hardly report anything as it is

can't have it both ways

That'd be like saying Jason Cole isn't believable when he gave that interview to spanos when he talked about fighting and having 9 votes to block a move - but now its credible when he talks about the NFL trying to urge Kroenke to work with Spanos.

 

[blue4]

Again that falls under people not caring. The story of St Louis working to get a new stadium isn't nearly as big as the story of football coming back to the second largest city. They don't report about San Diego or Oakland either, but Carson will get a few sentences.

Lol, isn't that what I said before that you disagreed with? Fact is there's been a ton of speculation pro LA that St Louis media hasn't touched and vice versa.
And really, outside of the 4 cities involved, no one cares about football coming back to the second largest city. It's not a huge problem to other people. That's the way I see it anyway.

 

[Moostache]

Why do people pretend to not be able to understand this issue? The short hand is "money talks and bullshit walks", but the longer version is essentially Mark Davis is going to be forced out, and its not about Kroenke or the Rams, its about the lack of wealth required to play the NFL version of Game of Thrones.

(Speculation to follow...scroll over it to highlight and read if desired...)

Kroenke ending up with the Raiders is not that hard to envision. Negotiations do not EVER start at the place that they end...people around here and at the PD cesspool forum act like Kroenke would have to first have a team for sale in order to begin the process of finding a local St. Louis owner to take over the Rams franchise. Not true, not even remotely true.

I stand by the proposition that the guy with the least money and least power and least friends, Davis, is the guy who gets the shaft in the end. Add to that the fact that Oakland is the city doing the absolute least to accommodate their NFL franchise and the picture is clearer still. Davis won't own the Raiders and Kroenke won't own the Rams and neither of them will be in their current locations at the end of this all.

The Rams will end up right where they belong - their adopted home, in a new facility and under local ownership that cares about the city and region.
Kroenke will end up in L.A., where he wants to be and with a legendary AFL/NFL franchise. he will receive considerations from the league to facilitate this - a relocation fee waiver to start.
Davis will be out of the NFL ownership, but also financially secure for life.
What remains to be seen is how much the NFL wants 2 teams in L.A. and how badly Spanos wants to stay in SD instead of being a boot licking tennant.

I think the hows and whys and whens of all this are being discussed now and have been since January.
Peacock is not doing all this to waste his time, neither is Kroenke.

In the end, I remain a broken record - Rams in St. Louis, Raiders in L.A. and Chargers in a California city TBD (maybe a 2nd NFL stadium, maybe as a 2nd team in Inglewood, maybe in a new SD facility.

If the Rams were moving, Kroneke would have said so many times over by now.
He would have plastered the logo on everything and said the application is filled out and ready to file.

 

[iced]

Why do people pretend to not be able to understand this issue? The short hand is "money talks and bullcrap walks", but the longer version is essentially Mark Davis is going to be forced out, and its not about Kroenke or the Rams, its about the lack of wealth required to play the NFL version of Game of Thrones.

Imo when it comes to owners, money talks. Which i speculate thats why the rumor of the NFL wanting Kroenke to work with Spanos might carry some weight - 2 teams in LA is a helluva lot more revenue.. But according to the same rumors, they appear to have some kind of issues or rift between them. That's why I believe, if the Carson project passes, that will be the one they choose.That's the option with the biggest revenue streams,imo.

You get the LA, SD faithful, keep Oakland/Bay area, and St.Louis markets while the other owners can avoid adjusting bylaws like waiving fees, and only have to use 1 G4 loan.

I stand by the proposition that the guy with the least money and least power and least friends, Davis, is the guy who gets the shaft in the end. Add to that the fact that Oakland is the city doing the absolute least to accommodate their NFL franchise and the picture is clearer still. Davis won't own the Raiders and Kroenke won't own the Rams and neither of them will be in their current locations at the end of this all.

Another way to look at it - which cities have a stadium on the table? St.Louis...Unless San Diego finds a way to come up with the public funding and financing (which that state has been reluctant to do), I don't see these 2 teams getting new stadiums unless the Carson project comes through. And then which begs the question - would the owners rather have 2 teams or 1? (unless spanos does a 180 and decides to work with Kroenke, which for all intentions and purposes he hasn't).

They'll look for the best scenario that works for all 3 owners - what deals, stadiums, and options come to fruition is another story

If the Rams were moving, Kroneke would have said so many times over by now.
He would have plastered the logo on everything and said the application is filled out and ready to file.

I don't know - i'm split on this one... on one hand, doing so would drive down ticket sales and revenue. On the other hand, he'll be able to say the team isn't being supported - then again you can't expect support if you're planning to leave. That'd be like starting to get divorced and telling your wife "Hey I'm kickin you to the curb for a younger and hotter model - but you're gonna need to support me in the mean time and be stuck with the bill after i'm gone"

 

[bluecoconuts]

I agree - drama sells clicks.

But you can't easily dismiss something because it doesn't have legs coming from St.Louis when they hardly report anything as it is

can't have it both ways

That'd be like saying Jason Cole isn't believable when he gave that interview to spanos when he talked about fighting and having 9 votes to block a move - but now its credible when he talks about the NFL trying to urge Kroenke to work with Spanos.

Sure I can, while I agree that the LA Times isn't talking about financing updates, and why should they, I would say that if there was real talks of Kroenke selling the Rams, and then buying the Raiders (meaning that Davis wants t sell, or might get forced out) there would be more chatter about it.

One, Oakland obviously would be very interested in this, because half of the equation is about them. And two, the national NFL guys, Albert Breer, Jason La Canfora, Rich Eisen, Jeff Darlington, Adam Schefer, Ian Rapoport, etc, they would have certainly looked into it and if there was real talks, they would have mentioned it. That's a pretty big story, and their job is to report on the NFL, why wouldn't they discuss it?

As for Jason Cole, luckily I've never considered hi credible.

Lol, isn't that what I said before that you disagreed with? Fact is there's been a ton of speculation pro LA that St Louis media hasn't touched and vice versa.
And really, outside of the 4 cities involved, no one cares about football coming back to the second largest city. It's not a huge problem to other people. That's the way I see it anyway.

Nah, I don't think that that most cities care about the individual efforts of the different cities, but I think they'd care about an ownership change. I mean Kroenke selling the Rams to a local ownership group is a big deal. A bigger deal is him pushing out the fucking 60 owners of the Raiders (I get the feeling Kroenke wants to own as much as possible, bigger cut of the pie) to move them to LA? The NFL essentially forcing out two owners so that a single team can leave?

If there was a rumor that a local LA group was planning on buying the Rams and moving them, and it wasn't being talked about, I'd dismiss that one too.

 

[iced]

Sure I can, while I agree that the LA Times isn't talking about financing updates, and why should they, I would say that if there was real talks of Kroenke selling the Rams, and then buying the Raiders (meaning that Davis wants t sell, or might get forced out) there would be more chatter about it.

One, Oakland obviously would be very interested in this, because half of the equation is about them. And two, the national NFL guys, Albert Breer, Jason La Canfora, Rich Eisen, Jeff Darlington, Adam Schefer, Ian Rapoport, etc, they would have certainly looked into it and if there was real talks, they would have mentioned it. That's a pretty big story, and their job is to report on the NFL, why wouldn't they discuss it?

Sounds like to me it's only credible if it suits your argument

 

[bluecoconuts]

Sounds like to me it's only credible if it suits your argument

No, it's credible when multiple credible sources repeat it.

 

[iced]

No, it's credible when multiple credible sources repeat it.

if they're just quoting the same source, how's that credible? that's really all the media does is piggy back off each other

by your standard the possibility of kroenke being forced to sell should be real since 3 or 4 people have written articles or chimed in on it within 24-36 hours

not buying it - you can't say in one breath it doesn't have legs so it can't be true while at the same time saying the national media hardly reports anything out of St.Louis