New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[OldSchool]

Time has always been an issue with the plan, among many other reasons - it was reported from when the proposal was first made and it still rings true today. This news isn't shocking - the onus is on San Diego to prove them wrong and get it to a vote.

I love how everyone acts like San Diego's plan is viable - when it's not. No stadium yet has met the requirements Grubman has stated for a viable stadium proposal - not even St.Louis has until the financing is secured.

The tentative plan was to have a vote on Dec. 15, 2015, which would have been well before the January 2016 window opens for teams to apply for relocation to Los Angeles.

However, the Chargers don't think getting a ballot measure ready that fast is possible and the team's special counsel, Mark Fabiani, made that clear in a statement.

San Diego said they can get it to a vote. The Chargers said they don't it's possible because of the potential of lawsuits. They don't know if there will be lawsuits they're anticipating them though. Just curious what makes San Diego's plan not viable? I also wasn't aware they'd pitched it to Grubman yet.

 

[iced]

San Diego said they can get it to a vote. The Chargers said they don't it's possible because of the potential of lawsuits. They don't know if there will be lawsuits they're anticipating them though. Just curious what makes San Diego's plan not viable? I also wasn't aware they'd pitched it to Grubman yet.

If they can then it shouldn't be a problem, and then the Chargers wouldn't have any ground to stand on in that regard. Just like Kroenke with St.Louis and their financing.

And I was talking about what Grubman has listed as requirements for a viable stadium - there are other issues with the San Diego plan that the NFL has rumored to have, and I think the biggest two are: 1)chargers paying rent (city of san diego actually pays them to play there) , 2) Selling the land at their quoted price of $225 million, without a buyer even lined up. That's just a guess...

Although what I think is funny is that Spanos should supposedly take a bad plan while Kroenke should be allowed to leave "because he doesn't like the plan"

 

[bluecoconuts]

Although what I think is funny is that Spanos should supposedly take a bad plan while Kroenke should be allowed to leave "because he doesn't like the plan"

I don't think he should take the deal if he doesn't want it. Can't force people to spend money they don't want.

 

[OldSchool]

The article I read had both the Chargers and SDSU paying rent there. That article also listed the land sale as an obstacle to getting the stadium done. They didn't seem to think it was a problem getting it sold just a difference in estimates of how much money it would generate. Interesting though thanks for the reply.

 

[OldSchool]

Although what I think is funny is that Spanos should supposedly take a bad plan while Kroenke should be allowed to leave "because he doesn't like the plan"

I don't think he should take the deal if he doesn't want it. Can't force people to spend money they don't want.

I agree, I don't think anybody will be able to force an NFL owner or any business owner to spend money they don't want to spend.

 

[iced]

The article I read had both the Chargers and SDSU paying rent there. That article also listed the land sale as an obstacle to getting the stadium done. They didn't seem to think it was a problem getting it sold just a difference in estimates of how much money it would generate. Interesting though thanks for the reply.

It's still listed as part of their stadium plan, not to mention the amount they want to charge the chargers. Time is also the big thing - like I said, there were 3 or 4 things mentioned that the NFL wouldn't be fond of right when/slightly before the San Diego plan was released. I tried to find it on google to no avail - although I do remember the tweets were posted in this thread at some point..And so far, those seem to be right on point.

IIRC Grubman said the things a stadium needed to have to be a viable stadium plan were: financing and land secured, the stadium itself meeting NFL approval

when we heard San diego might have to wait til December to get a vote, word was that could be an issue because of the accelerated time line...Problem is they've had time on their side (14 years)

 

[iced]

I don't think he should take the deal if he doesn't want it. Can't force people to spend money they don't want.

As far as Kroenke and St.Louis, it's still a hogwash excuse to me. You can't tell me in the same breath that Kroenke doesn't like the plan in St.Louis when he refuses to answer the phone. It's not like the task force has said "the riverfront stadium is your only option" or restricting him by any means. Don't even assume about revenue streams or deals - you don't know that nor has that even been negotiated upon. Clearly money or stadium is not the issue if St.Louis is willing to pony up $400 million vs him funding it on his own - and if Kroenke were so inclined to build a huge stadium here, he could do it easily.. But thats not the case at all, nor even remotely close to the Chargers.

The St.Louis proposal is light years ahead of the rest - the only contigency is on their financing being done (which all indications thus far is that it won't be an issue, but that's later TBD). And I am sure St.Louis would have no problem if Kroenke wanted to invest a high amount of dollars for a kick ass Stadium in St.Louis. The berter question is does he want to , and how will the other owners feel about it vs Spanos, and Davis, whom don't have deals anything close to viable like St.Louis does (I think you can forget oakland entirely, who said they will not spend public money)

 

[bluecoconuts]

As far as Kroenke and St.Louis, it's still a hogwash excuse to me. You can't tell me in the same breath that Kroenke doesn't like the plan in St.Louis when he refuses to answer the phone.

Sure he can, it's not like he isn't in the loop, he has Demoff filling him in every step of the way. It'd be one thing if there was no contact with the Rams at all, but that's not the case. The Rams have been quite involved every step of the way. Kroenke has ensured that even if St Louis doesn't remain the home for the Rams it's still an NFL market. That could help him if the NFL is happy that he didn't torch the market so he could leave.

It's not like the task force has said "the riverfront stadium is your only option" or restricting him by any means. Don't even assume about revenue streams or deals - you don't know that nor has that even been negotiated upon.

No, but that is what has been pressed forward, and if Kroenke doesn't want it they have to start from square one. In terms of revenue splits, that hasn't been negotiated on, but a fair amount of it has already been taken off the table, PSL, ownership, and they could be sticking points, especially when they want him to cover over 50% of the bill.

Clearly money or stadium is not the issue if St.Louis is willing to pony up $400 million vs him funding it on his own

Are you talking about money from Stan or St Louis? That can be an issue.. St Louis already has had some missteps with the funding trying to figure it out, and Kroenke may not feel that he'll get enough of a return from the market if he invests the type of money he's willing to invest elsewhere. Without having the access that he does to assess each market, we don't know what the case is, but it's not impossible to think that he may have crunched numbers and found that he can't make his dollar go as far in St Louis, therefore he's willing to spend more in LA.

and if Kroenke were so inclined to build a huge stadium here, he could do it easily.. But thats not the case at all, nor even remotely close to the Chargers.

Of course he could, but if he doesn't want to, nobody can force him. Spanos could do that in San Diego as well by the way, but I think it comes down to the same thing, he doesn't want to.

The St.Louis proposal is light years ahead of the rest - the only contigency is on their financing being done (which all indications thus far is that it won't be an issue, but that's later TBD). And I am sure St.Louis would have no problem if Kroenke wanted to invest a high amount of dollars for a kick ass Stadium in St.Louis.

St Louis is certainly ahead, but it doesn't matter unless they finish, and that included getting the Rams to sign on. If the Rams signed on then St Louis is set... If the Chargers signed on then San Diego is also set. Everything hinges on getting the teams to sign on and agree to spend a bunch of money.

The berter question is does he want to , and how will the other owners feel about it vs Spanos, and Davis, whom don't have deals anything close to viable like St.Louis does (I think you can forget oakland entirely, who said they will not spend public money)

Same thing as above, if Stan says he doesn't want to spend money in St Louis, and they cite that as the reason why he can't move, he could make a fuss about letting Spanos move despite not wanting to spend money in San Diego. While the projects differ on several points, it still boils down to both plans being workable if the teams want to play ball. Oakland is different, they don't have money to build a stadium anywhere, they need a lot of help regardless. I think at this point the only team is really working and exhausting all options is the Raiders, who in all likeliness are the only ones who genuinely want to stay where they are.


Regardless though, you cannot make an owner spend money they don't want to, and it'll be hard to use that as the primary reason to block the Rams or the Chargers unless they block both of them. If they're very confident that neither of them would be willing to take them to court over the issue, they may try to swing that. I think they're going to need to work things out before it comes to a vote though.

 

[blue4]

This is a Rams fan board right? Why is everyone trying to crap on us now?

During the season we all blamed the refs, we get mad when others rank us low, when PFF says we don't have good offensive players, yet now we're doing it to ourselves? What is this blasphemy?

I realize the conversation has moved past this probably but this isn't about how we as fans view the team it's about how owners who don't care will view the team. This is a thread built on trying to logically predict who will relocate right? If we can't logically look at the state of the Rams then what's the point? How can we try to get a handle on what the owners might think if we have to assume that they will view sub .500 play as average?

 

[blue4]

Sure he can, it's not like he isn't in the loop, he has Demoff filling him in every step of the way. It'd be one thing if there was no contact with the Rams at all, but that's not the case. The Rams have been quite involved every step of the way. Kroenke has ensured that even if St Louis doesn't remain the home for the Rams it's still an NFL market. That could help him if the NFL is happy that he didn't torch the market so he could leave.



No, but that is what has been pressed forward, and if Kroenke doesn't want it they have to start from square one. In terms of revenue splits, that hasn't been negotiated on, but a fair amount of it has already been taken off the table, PSL, ownership, and they could be sticking points, especially when they want him to cover over 50% of the bill.



Are you talking about money from Stan or St Louis? That can be an issue.. St Louis already has had some missteps with the funding trying to figure it out, and Kroenke may not feel that he'll get enough of a return from the market if he invests the type of money he's willing to invest elsewhere. Without having the access that he does to assess each market, we don't know what the case is, but it's not impossible to think that he may have crunched numbers and found that he can't make his dollar go as far in St Louis, therefore he's willing to spend more in LA.



Of course he could, but if he doesn't want to, nobody can force him. Spanos could do that in San Diego as well by the way, but I think it comes down to the same thing, he doesn't want to.



St Louis is certainly ahead, but it doesn't matter unless they finish, and that included getting the Rams to sign on. If the Rams signed on then St Louis is set... If the Chargers signed on then San Diego is also set. Everything hinges on getting the teams to sign on and agree to spend a bunch of money.



Same thing as above, if Stan says he doesn't want to spend money in St Louis, and they cite that as the reason why he can't move, he could make a fuss about letting Spanos move despite not wanting to spend money in San Diego. While the projects differ on several points, it still boils down to both plans being workable if the teams want to play ball. Oakland is different, they don't have money to build a stadium anywhere, they need a lot of help regardless. I think at this point the only team is really working and exhausting all options is the Raiders, who in all likeliness are the only ones who genuinely want to stay where they are.


Regardless though, you cannot make an owner spend money they don't want to, and it'll be hard to use that as the primary reason to block the Rams or the Chargers unless they block both of them. If they're very confident that neither of them would be willing to take them to court over the issue, they may try to swing that. I think they're going to need to work things out before it comes to a vote though.

You assume a lot with regards to the amount of time Demoff has actually spent on the plan in St Louis and how involved the Rams have been.

People like to say that Stan not talking to St Louis personally is just how he does business and that's true. It is how he does business. What people don't stop to think about is whether or not other owners will view that as legitimate. Because it's not the way some others do business. Just saying it's Stan's way means nothing.

 

[Moostache]

If San Diego is smart, they will approach Kroenke on the down low and start back channel communications with him.

It certainly looks like the Chargers are set on getting out of SD and into Carson. I really want the Rams to stay put in St. Louis and I DEFINITELY want to see the riverfront stadium get done...BUT...let's spit ball for a minute. San Diego is essentially getting face washed by the Chargers at this point. Kroenke's hopes for Inglewood seem to rest on either the failure of the St. Louis effort or pulling the Raiders away from Carson...

OR Enos Stanley could do the unthinkable...

If he loses to Carson, he just might have to play another year in the dome and then launch a bid to move to a new stadium in San Diego.

Think about it...

Carson ends up happening and Inglewood is denied by the owners as a 3rd LA team is not happening.
Kroenke then rejects the Riverfront stadium and says he will stay year to year in the dome...
Kroenke could get a land deal from San Diego and tax credits for infrastructure...he might get a deal similar to what St. Louis is offering, but more on his own terms...
He could easily build his California palace in San Diego instead of Inglewood...
Everything that is touted as a 'positive' for him in LA would be there in SD too...Super Bowls, exposure, fan base, raised franchise value, etc....
I have heard the NFL say that they do not want 3 teams in Southern California, but that happened before and could easily happen again if they decide to look the other way to appease someone...

Could we see the San Diego Rams playing the Los Angeles Chargers of Carson in 2019???
Or how about the Oakland Rams playing the San Francisco 49er's? (gasp....clutch the pearls!!!)

I still think we'll be watching the Rams games live from St. Louis, but there are certainly going to be some crazier potentials discussed between now and August 11th...its definitely getting down to crunch time...more than half way through June and this relocation saga is going into its 7th month!

 

[iced]

No, but that is what has been pressed forward, and if Kroenke doesn't want it they have to start from square one. In terms of revenue splits, that hasn't been negotiated on, but a fair amount of it has already been taken off the table, PSL, ownership, and they could be sticking points, especially when they want him to cover over 50% of the bill.

All pure Speculation of details that haven't been released - you have no idea how the splits work nor the revenue, in addition to any changes *should* Kroenke actually come to the table.

Are you talking about money from Stan or St Louis? That can be an issue.. St Louis already has had some missteps with the funding trying to figure it out, and Kroenke may not feel that he'll get enough of a return from the market if he invests the type of money he's willing to invest elsewhere. Without having the access that he does to assess each market, we don't know what the case is, but it's not impossible to think that he may have crunched numbers and found that he can't make his dollar go as far in St Louis, therefore he's willing to spend more in LA.

I'm talking about money in general being an issue.. Kroenke does not face any financial issues, nor could he claim unlike a Spanos or Davis without Goldman Sachs backing them (which they didn't have in the past)

St Louis is certainly ahead, but it doesn't matter unless they finish, and that included getting the Rams to sign on. If the Rams signed on then St Louis is set... If the Chargers signed on then San Diego is also set. Everything hinges on getting the teams to sign on and agree to spend a bunch of money.

I don't believe it's that simple. The stadium plan has to actually viable; as if they could agree and start the plan tomorrow with the important details secured (land, financing, stadium design approval). If a team a proposal doesn't have those set in stone (*Ahem* SD selling land at their price of $225 million plus going through process of legally selling it, let alone the vote), its not viable

Same thing as above, if Stan says he doesn't want to spend money in St Louis, and they cite that as the reason why he can't move, he could make a fuss about letting Spanos move despite not wanting to spend money in San Diego. While the projects differ on several points, it still boils down to both plans being workable if the teams want to play ball. Oakland is different, they don't have money to build a stadium anywhere, they need a lot of help regardless. I think at this point the only team is really working and exhausting all options is the Raiders, who in all likeliness are the only ones who genuinely want to stay where they are.

I don't think he can - Spanos doesn't have the financial backing Kroenke does, and it's not like Goldman Sachs has pledged to build any stadium in any city. They're pledging to Carson.... And good luck telling the other owners you can't get a stadium in St.Louis when they're offering the best stadium plan of 3.... not to mention no one believes Kroenke is going to jump ahead of the line to LA over Spanos; especially when 2 teams will generate more revenue than 1. And unlike inglewood, those teams own the land 50/50.

Regardless though, you cannot make an owner spend money they don't want to, and it'll be hard to use that as the primary reason to block the Rams or the Chargers unless they block both of them. If they're very confident that neither of them would be willing to take them to court over the issue, they may try to swing that. I think they're going to need to work things out before it comes to a vote though.

I don't think its going to be difficult at all for the other owners. At the end of the day, St.Louis is the only city that's offering a stadium that meets their criteria in a timely fashion, while giving all 3 owners a new stadium and maximizing revenue with 2 teams in Carson

 

[8to12]

If (and I will hope out hope until the vans leave Rams Park with gear in the back) they do leave, LA fans should be glad that the St. Louis fan base took up the cross of the 15-65 era and the 10 consecutive non-winning, non-playoff seasons and a far better team would be leaving St. Louis than the one that arrived in the first place.

Nothing personal, but I couldn't care less. If a winning record is what you are after than go find a winning team to cheer for. I am a Ram fan from outside of LA that has been traveling to St Louis one or two times a season for the past 17 years. It is an honor to see my team play in person....I do it for the magic of seeing the team on the field and for the excitement of the game. The end result is not my purpose for traveling to see my team play.
Let me ask you, when you but tickets to a Ram game, do you ask if the tickets are refundable if the Rams lose?

 

[bluecoconuts]

I realize the conversation has moved past this probably but this isn't about how we as fans view the team it's about how owners who don't care will view the team. This is a thread built on trying to logically predict who will relocate right? If we can't logically look at the state of the Rams then what's the point? How can we try to get a handle on what the owners might think if we have to assume that they will view sub .500 play as average?

I think saying the Rams are average is perfectly logical. They're roughly in the middle of the pack, they have games where they shut down what should be a better team, and games where they fold against an otherwise winnable opponent. Thats what I'd expect from an average team. If we're expecting them to get over the hunt and be a player or two away from the playoffs, how can we then say they're not even average?

You assume a lot with regards to the amount of time Demoff has actually spent on the plan in St Louis and how involved the Rams have been.

People like to say that Stan not talking to St Louis personally is just how he does business and that's true. It is how he does business. What people don't stop to think about is whether or not other owners will view that as legitimate. Because it's not the way some others do business. Just saying it's Stan's way means nothing.

Thats just what the task force says, that he's been there, working with them, going to market studies, etc.

In terms of faulting him for how he does business, I can't imagine they would do that. These are smart guys, they know how businesses are ran, and they know how some guys delegate and some guys let others be their eyes and ears. To fault him for how he runs his business would be stupid. Especially since he's doing a better job of it than they have.

All pure Speculation of details that haven't been released - you have no idea how the splits work nor the revenue, in addition to any changes *should* Kroenke actually come to the table

PSL numbers are in the financial breakdown, and publicly owned is a big selling point. Those both come from the task force, that's not speculation.

I'm talking about money in general being an issue.. Kroenke does not face any financial issues, nor could he claim unlike a Spanos or Davis without Goldman Sachs backing them (which they didn't have in the past

Spanos is a billionaire, he has the money to make it work in San Diego if he wanted. He needs help to get to LA, but not to stay in San Diego.

I don't believe it's that simple. The stadium plan has to actually viable; as if they could agree and start the plan tomorrow with the important details secured (land, financing, stadium design approval). If a team a proposal doesn't have those set in stone (*Ahem* SD selling land at their price of $225 million plus going through process of legally selling it, let alone the vote), its not viable

Sure it is, if San Diego bought in it would be. Without them its not. Just like St Louis, everyone can dance and talk about checking all the boxes they want, but the if the most important one, being the team buys in, then its not viable.

I don't think he can - Spanos doesn't have the financial backing Kroenke does, and it's not like Goldman Sachs has pledged to build any stadium in any city. They're pledging to Carson.... And good luck telling the other owners you can't get a stadium in St.Louis when they're offering the best stadium plan of 3.... not to mention no one believes Kroenke is going to jump ahead of the line to LA over Spanos; especially with 2 team will generate more revenue than 1. And unlike inglewood, those teams own the land 50/50.

Again, he's a billionaire, he can make it work if he wanted to.
Goldman Sachs has helped out many cities before with many different venues, I'm sure if they wanted they could help in San Diego as well.

I'd say that Kroenke is already in the front of the line for LA.

As for Carson, it is NOT a 50/50 split, this is from them, the Chargers will own a majority of it, in fact they won't say how much, probably because the Raiders are getting scraps.

Two teams in Inglewood still make more than two in Carson.

I don't think its going to be difficult at all for the other owners. At the end of the day, St.Louis is the only city that's offering a stadium that meets their criteria in a timely fashion, while giving all 3 owners a new stadium and maximizing revenue with 2 teams in Carson

I do. "you can't leave because they made an offer"
"But I don't want that offer, San Diego made an offer as well"
"It wasn't as far along, too bad"
"Well I'm not accepting that so now what?"
"Uhhhh..."

You can't make Kroenke spend money if he doesn't want to. Meaning if he doesn't want the St Louis stadium, it doesn't solve three solutions. It solves two. Just as Inglewood does. Except Inglewood generates more money. The difference is Kroenke has indicated he'll help the team (Raiders) get a new stadium... Suddenly three teams are settled AND all three owners are happy.

 

[blue4]

I think saying the Rams are average is perfectly logical. They're roughly in the middle of the pack, they have games where they shut down what should be a better team, and games where they fold against an otherwise winnable opponent. Thats what I'd expect from an average team. If we're expecting them to get over the hunt and be a player or two away from the playoffs, how can we then say they're not even average?



Thats just what the task force says, that he's been there, working with them, going to market studies, etc.

In terms of faulting him for how he does business, I can't imagine they would do that. These are smart guys, they know how businesses are ran, and they know how some guys delegate and some guys let others be their eyes and ears. To fault him for how he runs his business would be stupid. Especially since he's doing a better job of it than they have.



PSL numbers are in the financial breakdown, and publicly owned is a big selling point. Those both come from the task force, that's not speculation.



Spanos is a billionaire, he has the money to make it work in San Diego if he wanted. He needs help to get to LA, but not to stay in San Diego.



Sure it is, if San Diego bought in it would be. Without them its not. Just like St Louis, everyone can dance and talk about checking all the boxes they want, but the if the most important one, being the team buys in, then its not viable.



Again, he's a billionaire, he can make it work if he wanted to.
Goldman Sachs has helped out many cities before with many different venues, I'm sure if they wanted they could help in San Diego as well.

I'd say that Kroenke is already in the front of the line for LA.

As for Carson, it is NOT a 50/50 split, this is from them, the Chargers will own a majority of it, in fact they won't say how much, probably because the Raiders are getting scraps.

Two teams in Inglewood still make more than two in Carson.



I do. "you can't leave because they made an offer"
"But I don't want that offer, San Diego made an offer as well"
"It wasn't as far along, too bad"
"Well I'm not accepting that so now what?"
"Uhhhh..."

You can't make Kroenke spend money if he doesn't want to. Meaning if he doesn't want the St Louis stadium, it doesn't solve three solutions. It solves two. Just as Inglewood does. Except Inglewood generates more money. The difference is Kroenke has indicated he'll help the team (Raiders) get a new stadium... Suddenly three teams are settled AND all three owners are happy.

6 and 10 isn't average. It's just not. As a fan I don't like saying that, but it's not average.

Billionaire businessman are people too. They don't necessarily like the way every other businessman does his business. If you and I are billionaire owners and I show up for relocation meetings and you keep sending a minion, I'd be pissed. That's human nature. If I'm more involved in the process for YOUR move, I'd be pissed. Demoff may be your right hand man, but to me he's a minion. I'm not saying that this is how it's happening now, nor am I saying I know that's how anyone feels. Just saying that Stan's silence and separation has the potential to be as off putting to them as it is to us.

 

[Moostache]

...Let me ask you, when you but tickets to a Ram game, do you ask if the tickets are refundable if the Rams lose?

You are free to interpret that however you choose, but this question you ask is ridiculous. No, I don't look for a refund; but as a paying customer I expect a compelling product at a minimum. (SECTION DELETED I'd be careful here Moostache). Personally, I want to see a competitive team and a contest where the outcome is not a fait au compli at the coin toss.

15-65.
Worst. Record. EVER!

That is not just "bad". That is putrid. That is unacceptable at any level of competition.
It's one thing to be frustrated by a team that loses games they could win...like say the Fisher-led Rams.
But the difference is night and day to the product we saw for the 7 years before Fisher.

If you can't tell the difference, I question the sincerity of your question in the first place.

 

[dbrooks25]

Nothing personal, but I couldn't care less. If a winning record is what you are after than go find a winning team to cheer for. I am a Ram fan from outside of LA that has been traveling to St Louis one or two times a season for the past 17 years. It is an honor to see my team play in person....I do it for the magic of seeing the team on the field and for the excitement of the game. The end result is not my purpose for traveling to see my team play.
Let me ask you, when you but tickets to a Ram game, do you ask if the tickets are refundable if the Rams lose?

Who isn't after a winning record? Sorry, but this response doesn't make much sense to me. We are all loyal Rams fans. The fact that fans have still bought tickets to Rams games in this city despite this team being historically awful the past decade says a lot.

 

[dbrooks25]

I don't know what's in Kroenke's head, but I question those who think he simply doesn't like the Riverfront stadium. It could be that he just prefers L.A. over Stl right now. If the team is blocked from moving, do you KNOW for a fact that he won't want to invest in the Riverfront stadium? No, you don't. Unless he is hell bent on moving somewhere, not just L.A., I believe he will get on board with the Riverfront stadium proposal if the NFL blocks his bid to move.

 

[bluecoconuts]

6 and 10 isn't average. It's just not. As a fan I don't like saying that, but it's not average.

So, what they need to break .500 to be average? I mean I can go back into any game thread/vent thread and most of the talk is about how the refs screwed us. If they are holding us back, but we're not even an average team, then what the hell are we?

Billionaire businessman are people too. They don't necessarily like the way every other businessman does his business. If you and I are billionaire owners and I show up for relocation meetings and you keep sending a minion, I'd be pissed. That's human nature. If I'm more involved in the process for YOUR move, I'd be pissed. Demoff may be your right hand man, but to me he's a minion. I'm not saying that this is how it's happening now, nor am I saying I know that's how anyone feels. Just saying that Stan's silence and separation has the potential to be as off putting to them as it is to us.

On the flip side at least he sends someone to go and talk. Spanos sits in meetings and then comes out and has Fabiani trash everything and destroy any hope of getting a deal done. Is that considered better? What if Kroenke did that instead? Sat in a meeting, basically did nothing, and then had Demoff come out and trash the riverfront proposal? Where would we be then? I promise you, people would be looking at that stadium a lot differently, and they'd probably have close to no chance of getting their part of the financing figured out. Being quiet is just how some guys are, it's one thing if he is totally disconnected, but he's not. Demoff is his eyes and ears, he reports back to Kroenke and Kroenke tells him what to do, that's his job. Minion or not, that is still more involved in the process than "Well I'm going to sit here and then trash it in a few days". That's not getting involved in the process. The taskforce said that the Rams have been very helpful, very involved, and they have made tweaks per their suggestion. Maybe it was just being nice, but it was by their own admission, and I can't imagine that wont be enough for the other owners when they're talking about if they really worked with their city.

Thus far, people think that Stan has checked out, and he probably has, but he isn't trashing St Louis, and he's not trashing their project. He's helping them, and he is the only owner that is looking to move who is doing that.

 

[Rmfnlt]

I don't know what's in Kroenke's head, but I question those who think he simply doesn't like the Riverfront stadium. It could be that he just prefers L.A. over Stl right now. If the team is blocked from moving, do you KNOW for a fact that he won't want to invest in the Riverfront stadium? No, you don't. Unless he is hell bent on moving somewhere, not just L.A., I believe he will get on board with the Riverfront stadium proposal if the NFL blocks his bid to move.

The possibility (emphasis on the word POSSIBILITY) that Kroenke's moves thus far are purely leverage and, once the Riverfront Stadium details are ironed out, he fully intends to make good on those words he famously (or might end up being infamously) said years ago about how committed he is to St. Louis and Missouri.

Until the details of Riverfront are cemented... I have no idea what willl happen. I could care less about what's going on in Inglewood or Carson.

To me, I believe the picture will become clear once Riverfront is completely locked down.

And don't be surprised if that POSSIBILITY becomes reality... yes, it could happen. ESK hasn't said one word either way.