New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[RamFan503]

Are you suggesting this isn't 433 pages of everyone talking about how I'm right and how amazed they are about how right I am? I guess I should start reading some of the posts in here..

Well you KNOW I was just saying that the other day. I guess you are just right again. Damn yer gud.

 

[The Ripper]

6. The owners turned down the initial request to move from LA to St Louis until Shaw threatened to sue on anti-trust issues that would have potentially cost them roughly $2.2 BILLION and the NFL attorneys advised they would probably lose.

That was the max just from Georgia, Nixon had his own suit prepared and the total estimated from the 2 were over 6 billion. His suit included all the lost rent, game day receipts and tax revenue for the life of the lease.

 

[RamFan503]

It is amusing how often a St Louis media member publishes their opinions and it's taken %100 hook line and sinker as the gospel truth.

I believe that he simply posted a couple articles without comment if you are talking about the two that @iced just posted. Don't be "amused" and accuse people of being as gullible as a fish - it comes off as condescending. You are free to post articles if you'd like - hell - even comment on them.

 

[RamFan503]

That was the max just from Georgia, Nixon had his own suit prepared and the total estimated from the 2 were over 6 billion. His suit included all the lost rent, game day receipts and tax revenue.

Link? I've never seen that number bandied about - nor have I seen where Nixon had a separate suit ready to be filed. Sounds logical though. I just haven't seen it so I'm going by what I have seen.

I have read that $2.2 Billion as the amount several times and that was considering treble damages. The question at that point became what would that kind of suit be worth today with a potential move back to LA? Do the owners really have the stomach to potentially be on the hook for (putting it on the way low side) $10 Billion dollars? Do they believe in their "strengthened" bylaws so much that they would potentially have over half of them go bankrupt over defending them? Sounds like a huge gamble.

 

[MrMotes]

Nixon had a separate suit ready to be filed.

Edit:

I see it's already been posted, but that quote by AG Nixon from 1995 about how the Rams have the legal right to play in the city of their choosing is a classic...

 

[D L]

It is amusing how often a St Louis media member publishes their opinions and it's taken %100 hook line and sinker as the gospel truth.

Oh for the love of Christ, don't start that shit. Anything pro STL has been downplayed or shotdown several times in this thread and the pro-LA things have mostly been looked at as the opposite.

 

[mr.stlouis]

Are you saying that Nixon requested the August NFL meeting? Because that isnt correct. He just said he wants the task force to get the issues with the funding and the court cases settled by August. Obviously it's not a coincidence, he wants it done before the owners meeting because it makes them look better.

He did not request the owners to meet in August, the meeting was set by them, and frankly probably without even thinking about asking any of the current home markets if its good for them. Correlation doesn't equal causation, these are two different things here.

Also the Carson thing is the same thing Inglewood did, it was a lot of mostly nothing then, and a lot of mostly nothing now. The only interesting thing about it was they showed some more details about the stadium, it was a watered down pitch to what they showed the NFL. Carson is doing the same thing. Its honestly nothing, and means nothing, again just as it meant nothing when Inglewood did it last month (or two months ago, I don't remember).

Ok, I misread that Nixon requested the faster timetable. However, Nixon did say he believes the faster time table is "designed to help us." So I was not far off.

The faster time table is a good thing for STL because the task force will be ready, according to Nixon. Fair?

I'm increasingly optimistic for STL.

Rams did not leave a very solid proposal on the table when they left LA, far from it. That's not the case here. I know Georgia left LA out to dry, but it only blemished her image in LA. Leaving STL after all this would blemish the league as a whole in future negotiations for teams moving. I don't think that's something it can afford to have happen if STL ties up its loose ends. They will be ready, this baby is approaching the home stretch, the fourth quarter. Go STL Rams

 

[RamFan503]

Oh for the love of Christ, don't start that crap. Anything pro STL has been downplayed or shotdown several times in this thread and the pro-LA things have mostly been looked at as the opposite.

Already dealt with - let it go.

BTW - it has cut both ways continuously through this thread. Please don't try to make it a one sided deal.

 

[-X-]

So....

They movin' or not?

 

[RamFan503]

So....

They movin' or not?

Absoposimaybe.

 

[-X-]

Absoposimaybe.

I guess I'll check back when we're on page 868 to see if there's an answer.

 

[iced]

Can you trust any of those teams based on those conditions? The Raiders have no money and a bad team, the Chargers have no money and an average at best team. The Rams have a pretty average team as well, but at least they have money.

not my quote but you can't compare the chargers record to the rams or raiders.. as much as it sucks, it is what it is... The record doesn't lie.

The chargers have been to the playoffs 5x since the last time the Rams saw the playoffs - including 4 divisional playoff games and 1 conference championship..

raiders and rams have some of the worst records over the past decade

 

[RAMSinLA]

Absoposimaybe

My new favorite word...

 

[bluecoconuts]

not my quote but you can't compare the chargers record to the rams or raiders.. as much as it sucks, it is what it is... The record doesn't lie.

The chargers have been to the playoffs 5x since the last time the Rams saw the playoffs - including 4 divisional playoff games and 1 conference championship..

raiders and rams have some of the worst records over the past decade

I know it wasn't your quote, I was commenting on Randy's quote.

What the Chargers did 3 or 4 or 5 years ago doesn't matter, it's what they do next year and the years after that. The Chargers have never really been that good, they had some some stretches here or there, but they could never really get over the hump. They're an average team.. The Raiders are in a mess from top to bottom and have been for a while. Rams are clawing themselves out of their hole but haven't quite made it yet. I'd say the Rams and Chargers are average, while the Raiders are poor as we stand right now.

 

[The Ripper]

Link? I've never seen that number bandied about - nor have I seen where Nixon had a separate suit ready to be filed. Sounds logical though. I just haven't seen it so I'm going by what I have seen.

I have read that $2.2 Billion as the amount several times and that was considering treble damages. The question at that point became what would that kind of suit be worth today with a potential move back to LA? Do the owners really have the stomach to potentially be on the hook for (putting it on the way low side) $10 Billion dollars? Do they believe in their "strengthened" bylaws so much that they would potentially have over half of them go bankrupt over defending them? Sounds like a huge gamble.

Each suit was a billion. I will go back through but I think the numbers came from The CVC vs The NFL lawsuit.

The suit would be based on the projected revenues so even just looking at the numbers from the Inglewood City Council Meeting it could be close to $ 20 billion. 30 years of lost revenues, the increase in value of the team, Superbowls and any fines that would be deemed punitive.

Antitrust suits are tricky and a lot would depend on the venue, LA or St Louis and even then it's a risk for both sides.

 

[bluecoconuts]

I know Georgia left LA out to dry, but it only blemished her image in LA. Leaving STL after all this would blemish the league as a whole in future negotiations for teams moving.

I disagree that the NFL would be blemished as a whole and in a really bad spot. I honestly don't think that it would have much of an effect on the league or future negotiations for teams moving. It's never been that case before, and unfortunately no city is 'special' in the eyes of the league. It didn't ruin things when the Browns turned to the Raiders, or when the Oilers became the Titans, when Davis moved back and forth, when Georgia threatened lawsuits and bribed her way out of LA, and it wont happen if the Chargers or Raiders or Rams leave for LA.

 

[RamFan503]

I guess I'll check back when we're on page 868 to see if there's an answer.

Datsun?

 

[RamFan503]

Each suit was a billion. I will go back through but I think the numbers came from The CVC vs The NFL lawsuit.

The suit would be based on the projected revenues so even just looking at the numbers from the Inglewood City Council Meeting it could be close to $ 20 billion. 30 years of lost revenues, the increase in value of the team, Superbowls and any fines that would be deemed punitive.

Antitrust suits are tricky and a lot would depend on the venue, LA or St Louis and even then it's a risk for both sides.

IF - big if - it did go to a lawsuit, it would indeed likely be tricky and depend a lot on who was hearing the case. The dollar amounts would be staggering for sure. No real need to look it up as far as I'm concerned. It was billions and I agree that it was the real reason the owners acquiesced and not the few million that Georgia/Stan/St Louis... whoever... threw in to make it look like some kind of win for the NFL. In the grand scheme of things, I don't think it will really affect what happens this time around except that the NFL and Stan MIGHT weigh their options should it come to that.

A pending lawsuit could delay the Inglewood project enough to make it a moot point so there is plenty of risk to go around on suing to move. The NFL could bankrupt several owners and Stan could spend a bunch of money, really start to lose any chance of retaining the corporate interests in St Louis as well as many fans, and still lose. If it comes to that, I think it will be even messier than the last couple times.

 

[ChrisW]

New stadium video with Joe Buck narrating. I didn't see this posted in the last 4 pages, so here you go.

 

[blue4]

I know it wasn't your quote, I was commenting on Randy's quote.

What the Chargers did 3 or 4 or 5 years ago doesn't matter, it's what they do next year and the years after that. The Chargers have never really been that good, they had some some stretches here or there, but they could never really get over the hump. They're an average team.. The Raiders are in a mess from top to bottom and have been for a while. Rams are clawing themselves out of their hole but haven't quite made it yet. I'd say the Rams and Chargers are average, while the Raiders are poor as we stand right now.

More of the negative realism here, but there's no comparison between SD's record and ours over the last ten years. As we sit now, the Chargers are a much more proven team. We're a 6-10 team. Calling us average is a stretch, so I don't think the Rams tactic of selling the Rams organization as the most likely to succeed will work. They'd be better off to stick with the financial stability of the owner strategy. IMO.