New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[RamBill]

Jason Cole Talks NFL, Los Angeles and Rams’ Future

The topic of Los Angeles and relocation is at the forefront of NFL conversation this week as the league’s 32 owners meet in San Francisco for their annual May meetings. Bleacher Report’s Jason Cole, who’s there all week, jumped on The Ryan Kelley Morning After on Tuesday to discuss what he’s hearing on the latest developments and the Rams’ future.

Listen to Cole Interview


San Diego proposed their stadium project yesterday. What do you make of it?

"The simple analysis will show the Chargers are not going to go for this deal. (They have to deals going). They have the Carson deal, which is their leverage point against the city of San Diego. But that leverage point is becoming more and more a reality. That's the direction they're ultimately going to go because San Diego is so far behind where they need to be. The one thing that helps San Diego in all of this...something you can't quantify...is that (Chargers owner) Dean Spanos truly loves San Diego. The question is at what price is he willling to stay and at what price is he willing to go?"

What about the Raiders' situation?

"The Raiders' proposal is not really gaining any traction. At the end of the day, Mark Davis is not in a position where he can simply demand...he's cash-strapped. He doesn't have the kind of money (Rams owner Stan Kroenke) has to uproot his team. He's going to need a lot more help. That's why I always said if the Raiders are going to move to LA, they're going to go as the number two team (either with the Rams or Chargers)."

What about the prospect of the Raiders coming to St. Louis?

"I think that's way down the line. I don't think that's a really likeable scenario for the NFL. The NFL values St. Louis as a market. What works against them is Kroenke has the money and wants to move. Here's the thing that's bad for St. Louis: You get treated as a hand-me-down city. That's not really good for marketing long-term."

There have been reports the Rams could possibly stay and Kroenke would own a different team. What team would he own?

"Dean Spanos is not selling. The one team you have to think is in play is the Raiders. We'll all find out what happens when Mark Davis' mom passes away and what the inheritance tax looks like and what the burden is and whether he can keep the team or not."

Seems like St. Louis has made the most progress toward building a new stadium, yet the Rams are the most likely team to be moving. Fair statement?

"I think the Chargers are the most likely to move. I think the Rams are the ones to put the most pressure on anybody. I always said...Stan is a leverage guy. If he can leverage enough out of St. Louis to get them to pay enough of the bill, that might be attractive enough for him. Out of the three cities, San Diego is the one least tied to its team (because of the great location). The identity of San Diego is not tied in to the Chargers. The identity of the Raiders is tied in to Oakland very strongly. And the identity of St. Louis is tied in to generally in sports. Having a football team is very important to them for municipal interests as well besides just the entertainment value."

 

[RamBill]

Timeline, progress among relocation topics at owners meetings
By Nick Wagoner

http://espn.go.com/blog/st-louis-ra...ss-among-relocation-topics-at-owners-meetings

SAN FRANCISCO -- Since it was first mentioned at the March owners meetings, it's appeared likely that the window to file for relocation will be moved up from early winter to late fall. Some have speculated that teams could file as early as October.

And while that still remains a possibility, Eric Grubman, the NFL executive running point on all things stadium and relocation, said that this week's owners meetings might focus more on compressing the timeline rather than expediting it.

"I don’t know if we’ll move the window up," Grubman said. "The window now is defined as Jan. 1 to Feb. 15. That’s for contemplation of a March meeting decision.

"I think, and we’ll talk to membership tomorrow, that we could compress that time frame. We don’t need six weeks for the filing and I think it’s also possible and probably preferred that if there is a good relocation proposal that membership wants to pursue that they would do that before the March meeting. Exactly when that is, I don’t know. We’re not quite far enough."

So either way, the timeline for filing for relocation will likely be at the heart of the discussions this week among the league's owners. That also doesn't mean it will be the only Los Angeles-related topic up for discussion among the owners.

According to Grubman, today's conversations will also include updates on what's going on in Los Angeles, St. Louis, Oakland and San Diego. The clubs currently in cities will offer updates on efforts being made there, and the league will also provide updates on some of the logistics of their plans.

"As far as L.A. goes, the clubs will talk a little bit about what’s going on in their home markets, the meetings we’ve had, the progress that’s been made or not made depending on their point of view and probably have them talk about how they are doing in ticket sales and marketing," Grubman said. "The staff will present the various work streams that we’ve got going on in the areas of security and the market assessments and so forth and so on."

Grubman and his team have spent plenty of time over the past few months visiting the current home markets in St. Louis, Oakland and San Diego and gathering information on what's happening there as well as the two proposed Los Angeles sites.

The recent gathering of representatives of those projects in New York City with the Committee on Los Angeles Opportunities offered a comprehensive update on what's happening in those cities. That update will also be passed along to the owners here this week.

"Not just New York, all along the way," Grubman said. "We’ve been to all the markets, we’ve talked to a lot of people. We have a pretty good sense for the challenges and the contingencies of the various project proposals in all the markets: Los Angeles, Oakland, San Diego and St. Louis."

But even with all of that information being discussed, it's probably safe to assume that aside from the possible timeline tweaks, nothing too substantive will come from these meetings when it comes to Los Angeles or relocation.

"We try to give membership a sense of how we see it and what the risks are but we are not going to make any predictions or proclamations or probabilities," Grubman said.

 

[Goose]

 

[RamBill]

Joe Buck: ‘I Was Right’ About Stan Kroenke’s Desire to Be in to LA

FoxSports Broadcaster Joe Buck talked with Palmer Alexander III of The St. Louis American during the 15th Annual Joe Buck Classic. Buck stated that he was right about St. Louis Rams’ owner Stan Kroenke’s desire to have an NFL franchise based in Los Angeles. Buck is hopeful that the efforts to build a new stadium in STL is successful and the Rams can stay in St.Louis.

Watch Buck Interview

 

[Hacksaw]

just for the record if anyone wants to build a giant football stadium on my grave some day, I'd be honored. jestsayin...

Y'all are cold.

 

[RamFan503]

yea they've been a source funding - but my point was no where does it say where the profits go from PSL's. You said Kroenke doesn't get the PSL money - show me where something says that. Because as of right now Peacock's group has never mentioned where the PSL money profits go

What other profits? PSL sales are part of the funding mechanism for building the river front stadium. It's pretty cut and dry.

 

[Legatron4]

Joe Buck: ‘I Was Right’ About Stan Kroenke’s Desire to Be in to LA

FoxSports Broadcaster Joe Buck talked with Palmer Alexander III of The St. Louis American during the 15th Annual Joe Buck Classic. Buck stated that he was right about St. Louis Rams’ owner Stan Kroenke’s desire to have an NFL franchise based in Los Angeles. Buck is hopeful that the efforts to build a new stadium in STL is successful and the Rams can stay in St.Louis.

Watch Buck Interview

Usually i don't like when people pat their own back but Joe was one of the first to call this. And he's from STL. So I think he likes the Rams being there.

 

[OldSchool]

I have a question for some of you guys. IF the Rams stay in the Lou, and the Chargers and Raiders move to Carson, what do you guys think about playing in the AFC West? I know we lose our big rivalries, but do you think breathing life in to the Governors Cup, and playing the others in the AFC West will make it worth it?

Worst possible outcome imo. I love hating the Whiners and the Seahags and for the NFL to decide to change my favorite teams division and give up on a 48 year division rivalry with the Whiners would be a huge letdown. The Chargers and Raiders have only been teams 7 years longer than we've been rivals with the Whiners.

 

[Moostache]

I have a question for some of you guys. IF the Rams stay in the Lou, and the Chargers and Raiders move to Carson, what do you guys think about playing in the AFC West? I know we lose our big rivalries, but do you think breathing life in to the Governors Cup, and playing the others in the AFC West will make it worth it?

Rams in a revamped AFC West would be PERFECT! Home and home with the Chefs?!? I'm down for an I-70 trip and some KC style BBQ every year!

I have no interest in maintaining the SF-LA based rivalry of the Niners and Rams; let that die with the fantasy of bringing the Rams back to LA. Besides, Raider and Niner fans ALREADY hate each other...let the new SF-LA rivalry form around that hot mess. Just like Dodgers-Giants...

NFC West - LA Raiders, SF 49ers, Seattle Seahawks, Arizona Cardinals
AFC Wets - LA Chargers, Denver Broncos, Kansas City Chiefs, St. Louis Rams

 

[RamFan503]

I have a question for some of you guys. IF the Rams stay in the Lou, and the Chargers and Raiders move to Carson, what do you guys think about playing in the AFC West? I know we lose our big rivalries, but do you think breathing life in to the Governors Cup, and playing the others in the AFC West will make it worth it?

Hate the idea. For one, I like having a game each year in Seattle (though the NFL has totally screwed me over the past several years by having the game the same week as Christmas), and two, the Rams and Whiners must stay in the same division.

 

[iced]

Rams in a revamped AFC West would be PERFECT! Home and home with the Chefs?!? I'm down for an I-70 trip and some KC style BBQ every year!

I have no interest in maintaining the SF-LA based rivalry of the Niners and Rams; let that die with the fantasy of bringing the Rams back to LA. Besides, Raider and Niner fans ALREADY hate each other...let the new SF-LA rivalry form around that hot mess. Just like Dodgers-Giants...

NFC West - LA Raiders, SF 49ers, Seattle Seahawks, Arizona Cardinals
AFC Wets - LA Chargers, Denver Broncos, Kansas City Chiefs, St. Louis Rams

Any scenario involving Raiders and niners in the same division can be thrown right out the window. They are banned from playing each other in the preseason, NFL isn't gonna allow twice a season

 

[iced]

What other profits? PSL sales are part of the funding mechanism for building the river front stadium. It's pretty cut and dry.

I'm getting something about the PSL's revenue streamconfused with somethin I'm thinking.

 

[ChrisW]

Hate the idea. For one, I like having a game each year in Seattle (though the NFL has totally screwed me over the past several years by having the game the same week as Christmas), and two, the Rams and Whiners must stay in the same division.

The two most likely scenarios I've heard if the Chargers and Raiders moving to Carson would be either St. Louis to the AFC West or the Seahawks to the AFC West.

Any scenario involving Raiders and niners in the same division can be thrown right out the window. They are banned from playing each other in the preseason, NFL isn't gonna allow twice a season

Yea, It'd have to be the Chargers that move to the NFC West.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Pass on the Rams changing divisions, that'd be like changing up the NFC East or NFC North.

 

[RAGRam]

I have a question for some of you guys. IF the Rams stay in the Lou, and the Chargers and Raiders move to Carson, what do you guys think about playing in the AFC West? I know we lose our big rivalries, but do you think breathing life in to the Governors Cup, and playing the others in the AFC West will make it worth it?

Would love it, both Denver and KC are closer to St Louis than the nearest NFC West opponent. I'd also stop wearing the throwbacks, I know they were inspired by the uniforms we wore during the early GSOT, but they're still too reminiscent of LA for me.

Only downside I could see is going to LA once a year, but needs must.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Yea, It'd have to be the Chargers that move to the NFC West.

Raiders are the only team who's said they're open to changing conferences.

 

[ChrisW]

Raiders are the only team who's said they're open to changing conferences.

I think the NFL would be Crazy to play the Raiders against the 9ners twice a year.

 

[Moostache]

Raiders and Rams gave up the right to refuse divisional reassignment in '95...didn't they?

 

[The Ripper]

Raiders are the only team who's said they're open to changing conferences.

Raiders and Rams gave up the right to refuse divisional reassignment in '95...didn't they?

Yes, that is correct for the Rams. They don't have a vote on conference realignment. That was part of the resolution to allow them to relocate to St Louis. The commissioner casts the vote so it would be easy to move the Rams to the AFC. The Raiders didn't give that up

 

[Moostache]

Any scenario involving Raiders and niners in the same division can be thrown right out the window. They are banned from playing each other in the preseason, NFL isn't gonna allow twice a season

That's because the bay area gangs can't get along or play nice with others... put the Raiders in LA and treat the rivalry the same way MLB handles Dodgers vs. Giants after the fan there was stabbed a few years back...