New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[The Ripper]

Oh it'll be more, a lot more, than just a "couple million" (additionally, the by laws state he'd lose his share of the tv market contracts which is $200 million per team last year in addition to revenue share of merchandising, which i think was around $100 million per team...and the TV shares are increasing every year..this doesn't include other actions the NFL could take like withholding super bowls, etc... basically they can make life really hard, and in the end would it really be worth it?) - but the legal aspect and what could/might happen is honestly going to be way more complicated than whole the stadium fiasco. Especially with how the laws are written and there's no way to know what or how the NFL has altered their contracts prevent such a move.. And until we hear that Kroenke is going to pursue legal action, its pointless to debate. The only word we've heard as such is that kroenke would not go against the committee.

Stop with the bylaws because fines are only league policy and can change at anytime or be ignored by the owners. The rules in place a re pretty much the same ones that have existed since 1984,

Cutting out of the TV deal will allow him to go out and get his own contract so there is not much of a chance the NFL will risk that

 

[iced]

Stop with the bylaws because fines are only league policy and can change at anytime or be ignored by the owners. The rules in place a re pretty much the same ones that have existed since 1984,

Or stop with the the assumption that the owners will change or ignore the by the laws. Again, I'm not saying what they will do but what they can do - and if the courts ruled otherwise they would have ever right to enforce those penalties through their franchise agreements

 

[The Ripper]

Or stop with the the assumption that the owners will change or ignore the by the laws. Again, I'm not saying what they will do but what they can do - and if the courts ruled otherwise they would have ever right to enforce those penalties through their franchise agreements

NFL teams are individual businesses not a Subway franchise. The NFL makes up rules as they go all the time. We have already seen it in the relocation process. They said no relocation applications for this year. That's a change from the guidelines so no assumption there, when they just did it. How about domestic violence that changed to.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Believe what you want - the timeline is there, and like I said the NFL didn't have to remove it, nor were they inclined to do so until pressure. It was within their legal right to keep it - FCC couldn't touch them

Well yeah, that would be correlation. I don't really know much about why they suspended the rules, other than you saying it was due to congressional pressure. I don't recall seeing an article about it, but 503 said you posted articled that indicated it, so perhaps I missed it. Either way, I don't think that congress is going to do anything if the Rams relocate.

 

[iced]

Well yeah, that would be correlation. I don't really know much about why they suspended the rules, other than you saying it was due to congressional pressure. I don't recall seeing an article about it, but 503 said you posted articled that indicated it, so perhaps I missed it. Either way, I don't think that congress is going to do anything if the Rams relocate.

To each his own - I'm not claiming to be the all knowing, just reciting what the old man has expressed to me - and out of everyone thus far in this whole saga his weight carries the most to me because: a) obviously he's neutral (steeler fan) and doesn't work for the nfl lol, b) Lawyer/Professor teaching in Business Corporate Law c) It's the point he has kept emphasizing over the past 7 months every time i have discussed it with him: They have their attention. Congress has threatened their status either for the blackout rule and the domestic abuse scandals.Not that those are going to do them in, but the point being that they already have their attention, and as he so eloquently put it months ago, "The nfl doesn't want to wave the red flag at the bull (congress)."

The problem is the Anti-trust Laws are overly ambiguous and complex, and things are only made more complicated with the how the NFL operates, plays the political game with congress, and the way they have worded their contracts (I think the black out rule is a perfect example of how they try to safe guard themselves).

This really is going to be my last post regarding the legal angle of the side, both for the complexity and the rumors that have come out of Kroenke's camp. It's pointless in the mean time. It's almost like trying to do a mock draft for a draft 3 years ahead of time - too many variables to be played out.

 

[The Ripper]

To each his own - I'm not claiming to be the all knowing, just reciting what the old man has expressed to me - and out of everyone thus far in this whole saga his weight carries the most to me because: a) obviously he's neutral (steeler fan) and doesn't work for the nfl lol, b) Lawyer/Professor teaching in Business Corporate Law c) It's the point he has kept emphasizing over the past 7 months every time i have discussed it with him, and Congress has threatened their status either for the blackout rule and the domestic abuse scandals...the point being that they already have their attention, and as he so eloquently put it months ago, "The nfl doesn't want to wave the red flag at the bull (congress)."

The problem is the Anti-trust Laws are overly ambiguous and complex, and things are only made more complicated with the how the NFL operates, plays the political game with congress, and the way they have worded their contracts (I think the black out rule is a perfect example of how they try to safe guard themselves).

This really is going to be my last post regarding the legal angle of the side, both for the complexity and the rumors that have come out of Kroenke's camp. It's pointless in the mean time. It's almost like trying to do a mock draft for a draft 3 years ahead of time - too many variables to be played out.

That's a great point because if it comes to court challenge the venue is important. A court in St Louis could rule differently than in LA. The challenge would be that a court in St Louis has already ruled in favor of the teams being independent businesses in CVC vs the NFL but in the end it will depend on who sues and where.

The article you posted only had few quotes from individuals and that's not a groundswell of support. Congress likes to make a big production out of hearings but nothing ever comes of it. When we talked about this before I mentioned that the networks in particular DTV was pushing the NFL to eliminate the blackout rule to enhance the broadcasts. Television viewing has changed and people stream their content and that has a bigger effect than a few Senators and Congressman trying to make a name for themselves. The change had was more to do with league business than government interference. Just go look at the last 3 times the NFL went before Congress, it was always in front of a committee not the whole of Congress and nothing happened.

 

[WillasDad]

This is what I was talking about earlier. Despite every report ever filed, every whisper, every rumor coming out of the NFL office saying that Spanos has the respect of his fellow owners and is very popular people still portray him as a giant idiot. The bumbling billionaire who's powerless to stop the raging tide that is Stan. There is really no reason at this point to believe that Spanos is incompetent. Davis, of course, but Spanos? There's not been anyone other than Rams fans that I've seen suggesting that he's incompetent. I just don't think that's a smart assumption.

I've not read anywhere that Dean Spanos is incompetent. This idea's origin is directly from my own brainhole, so yea....

The Chargers have a reputation of not participating much in community-related activities or donating much to the difference SD causes. I don't know this to be true, but I've heard it being reported. I know, pure speculation, but that, along with the 14 years of b****ing about the stadium, can't help with building up goodwill for the Dean Spanos regime.

 

[The Ripper]

NFL won't lose their anti-trust status because they have enough senators and congresspeople in their pockets to ensure that they won't lose it.

No, I don't have a link but the fact that they have kept it for so long speaks volumes. . . The golden goose and all that.

Good point and the political contributions go both ways.

 

[blue4]

I've not read anywhere that Dean Spanos is incompetent. This idea's origin is directly from my own brainhole, so yea....

The Chargers have a reputation of not participating much in community-related activities or donating much to the difference SD causes. I don't know this to be true, but I've heard it being reported. I know, pure speculation, but that, along with the 14 years of b****ing about the stadium, can't help with building up goodwill for the Dean Spanos regime.

I've no doubt he's unpopular in SD. But I think he's got plenty of goodwill among the NFL. I think he's viewed as doing all the right things.

 

[OldSchool]

I've no doubt he's unpopular in SD. But I think he's got plenty of goodwill among the NFL. I think he's viewed as doing all the right things.

Which is interesting because all he does is turn down offers from the city and refuse to work with them. This latest proposal has a very significant amount of public funds too.

 

[The Ripper]

I've no doubt he's unpopular in SD. But I think he's got plenty of goodwill among the NFL. I think he's viewed as doing all the right things.

It's hard to tell since most of the talk about the Chargers comes from Fabiani and all the talk about them prior to relocation had always been negative about the organization.

 

[8to12]

Ticket sales are only 20 or 30% of the overall revenue; TV contracts alone rake in 60%.

It's sad but preventing a game from being blacked out can result in more money than ticket holders (local-tv market revenues from advertisers, etc.)

I understand what you're saying. But then why did Spanos complain about losing 25% of his fan base in LA if the Rams move there?

 

[WillasDad]

Luckily for Dean Spanos, SD has no choice but to deal with him in order to keep the team.

 

[iced]

I understand what you're saying. But then why did Spanos complain about losing 25% of his fan base in LA if the Rams move there?

Maybe he tried to pull an Al Davis and claim he had the rights to LA? lol

my only guess would be maybe to gain favor of the other owners? Truthfully don't know.

 

[bluecoconuts]

I understand what you're saying. But then why did Spanos complain about losing 25% of his fan base in LA if the Rams move there?

Because he's full of shit. He's so worried about 25% he's going to push away the other 75%? Yeah, okay. He wants LA the same reason Stan does, he see's more money in it. He just finally has motivation because Kroenke was sick of talking about it and decided to just do it.

 

[MrMotes]

It's hard to tell since most of the talk about the Chargers comes from Fabiani and all the talk about them prior to relocation had always been negative about the organization.

Yeah, funny now that works, they hire a PR guy and suddenly their PR gets better...

 

[RAMSinLA]

Have we here at ROD ever done a poll? I wonder what the outcome would be.
Will the Rams Eventually Move back to LA?
Yes or No
It might not be a good idea but...I would be very curious to see the outcome of that poll. lol

 

[Loyal]

According to Roggins, the presentation of the Carson situation was a disaster...
https://twitter.com/FredNBCLA

 

[bluecoconuts]

According to Roggins, the presentation of the Carson situation was a disaster...
https://twitter.com/FredNBCLA

He does seem to support Inglewood, so take that into consideration... However still quite confusing and sounds like a soup sandwich. Carson comes across very unprofessional too often, I can't imagine the NFL likes hearing that.

 

[Loyal]

He does seem to support Inglewood, so take that into consideration... However still quite confusing and sounds like a soup sandwich. Carson comes across very unprofessional too often, I can't imagine the NFL likes hearing that.

Yes. This is Kroenke's allure, or at least a major part of it...The NFL wants a slam dunk in LA, and this performance doesn't exude confidence for a project involving Two owners and Goldman Sachs, and everything has to work right for that project to be feasible. It WON'T be just Kroenke in Inglewood, but if necessary he could do it all himself (especially considering and his wifes wealth to be around 11 billion).