New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
Status
Not open for further replies.

LesBaker

Mr. Savant
Joined
Aug 23, 2012
Messages
17,460
Name
Les
OK, so what did Georgia Frontierre have to pay the league in order to move the Rams to St Louis in 1995? Because that move was originally voted against.

And if you read around about this topic you will kow that LOTS of things have changed in the NFL since. There are some good articles on the first two pages that you can read. Amy Trask wrote a piece that is excellent also.

Plainly said teams cannot just carpetbag like they used to.
 

Alan

Legend
Joined
Oct 22, 2013
Messages
9,766
RamFan503 still not convinced:
Hmmmmmm..... The SB is being played in AZ only one hour difference from the WEST coast and TWO hours difference from the East coast. Where is the next one being played? Oh yeah - Santa Clara, CA.

Superbowls and Probowls can be played at any time of day so there really isn't a problem with the whole primetime spot as it pertains to the East coast. It is not like regular season games where they are primarily played at 10am or 1pm PST.

Monday Night Football has been pretty successful - no? They start around 5pm PST on a weekday. Same with Thursday games.

I don't buy the idea that East coast SBs make the NFL more money.
A couple of things here:

You obviously forgot that I said this: " Central or Mountain time would be preferable." I believe that Phoenix is mountain time isn't it?

You also continue to ignore the fact that I said preferable. Of course they have to spread out where a SB gets played and who's playing the Monday and Thursday night games. They try to maximize their profits by adjusting the start time depending on where it's being played. Why do you think they do that? ;)

Last but not least, that's why it's my opinion and not a fact. Having said that it's my opinion and not a fact, don't you see any correlation between the start times of SB games 30 years ago and today? You think they just decided to start playing them at night because they're in league with the electric companies? :LOL: SBs and PBs can be played at anytime of the day or night but they aren't are they. If you're going to disagree with me you shouldn't bring up points that support my contention. PBs are played during the day and why is that? Could it be that by doing that the game is at night in the rest of the US?

BTW, I don't have an east coast bias. In fact, I dislike the east coast. I've lived in the midwest and CALIFORNIA most of my life and I like both of them much more than here. This was where the best jobs were when I retired from the Air Force or I wouldn't be here now. If I had my druthers I'd be living in St. Louis.
 

Boffo97

Still legal in 17 states!
Joined
Feb 10, 2014
Messages
5,278
Name
Dave
No chance of a comeback
By Dane Watkins / January 21st, 2015
Between the two of us, my father and I have witnessed nearly every moment of the pitiful pro football on display in St. Louis over the past 55 years, first with the Cardinals, and then with the Rams. But for the first time in my life, we will not be renewing our season tickets with the Rams.

The Rams have broken my heart year after year, disappointed me, and left me wondering why I spend my money and my time watching them play. It’s been a part of my life since I was three years old.

Unfortunately, recent events have changed all that. I never thought I would stop watching the Rams, but what transpired over the past few weeks was too much to endure.

Stan Kroenke, owner of the Rams, has decided the team will be playing football in Los Angeles soon. While nothing is official yet, the Rams are as good as gone.

Kroenke has the money (he’s one of the richest human beings on the planet, and his wife “Princess Wal-Mart” is worth more than him), he has the land (a however-many-acre plot in Inglewood, California with space not only for a stadium but room to develop parking lots and mini malls to accompany the field and fatten his wallet) and he has the team.

People have tried telling me not to worry—that it’s presumptuous to think the Rams will leave, that there’s no need to fret yet. They say the NFL has ruled out submissions to relocate in 2015—true, but not in 2016. They say the NFL owners wanted to control the LA market and that they don’t trust or like Kroenke. They say the NFL’s own bylaws prohibit a team from re-locating unless they have negotiated “in good faith” with the home city. They say it’s too early to say anything for certain.

Please. To believe the Rams will be in St. Louis in five years is incredibly naïve.

Firstly, the other NFL owners may not like Kroenke, but they do like money. And a team in LA would mean more money for them.

The NFL has owned the LA market for 20 years and done virtually nothing with it. Never before has such a viable owner, location and team been available for relocation.

It’s hard to move a team to Los Angeles; the real-estate market is a mess and the taxes are astronomical. But Kroenke already has the land, and can afford the taxes. They might not like him, but he can make them more money. A team in the second-biggest TV market in the United States will bring in more cash than a team in St. Louis. It’s simple and unfortunate math. If the LA Clippers are worth $2 billion, how high might the Rams’ stock rise if they were to move?

As for the NFL’s bylaws, they aren’t worth the paper they’re printed on. They were designed to keep people from owning professional sports teams in different franchises and thus tamper with different markets.

But the NFL is already making exceptions for Kroenke in terms of their “bylaws.” When Kroenke bought the Rams in 2010, he already owned professional sports teams in another market: Denver. He owns the Avalanche, the Nuggets, and the Major League Soccer team the Rapids. This means Kroenoke has violated the NFL’s cross-ownership laws multiple times.

To get around this, Kroenke bequeathed the teams to his son and daughter. How very generous of him. The NFL didn’t call him on this nonsense (it’s been four years), so to believe he has to negotiate in “good faith” with St. Louis is preposterous.

Besides, he already has a plan to deal with the pesky people who remind him of the relatively strong support in St. Louis. He’s alienated every fan with his plans in LA. The Rams will play 2015 in St. Louis in a nearly-empty dome. And then Kroenke will claim he has no support and will have to leave.

It’s amazing how transparent his plan is, but I’ve seen this movie before. (Maybe you have too—it’s called Major League.) If the NFL does stand up to Kroenke, he won’t hesitate to sue. And the NFL wouldn’t want to face a lawsuit. They’ve had enough bad PR lately.

Kroenke will throw money at the appropriate people (the Spanos family in San Diego comes to mind), and he will get what he wants. Multi-billionaires tend to get that.

And to those who look to Gov. Jay Nixon’s stadium task force leaders Dave Peacock and Bob Blitz to save the day: You need to adjust your expectations. Is it a nice drawing? Yes. But where is the money behind it? It’s mostly public money. If the public is called on to raise taxes to fund a new stadium, (for the second time in 20 years) the initiative will fail.

Furthermore, Peacock has already claimed the stadium needs an investment of at least $200 million from an NFL owner. They won’t get a dime from Kroenke.

Even worse, the city doesn’t even own all of the land necessary for the plan to work, and they plan for the stadium to be publicly operated. Why would Kroenke (who loves money) agree to lease a stadium that isn’t his in a city like St. Louis, when he can own a stadium and all of the amenities around it in a city like Los Angeles? Kroenke made his money in real estate. He buys land. He develops land. He does not lease.

My dad and I left the final Rams game against the Giants a few minutes early. We were rounding a concourse when we saw the Rams block a field goal against New York on the Jumbotron. We had the ball back with only moments remaining. Just the faintest chance of a comeback. I asked my dad if we could stop and see the end of the game. I wanted to see. Even then, I still believed. Maybe the Rams had a miracle up their sleeves.

They didn’t. Shaun Hill fumbled the snap from shotgun and the Giants recovered. I had to laugh. I was such a sucker. But not anymore.
 

bluecoconuts

Legend
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
13,073
No chance of a comeback
By Dane Watkins / January 21st, 2015
Between the two of us, my father and I have witnessed nearly every moment of the pitiful pro football on display in St. Louis over the past 55 years, first with the Cardinals, and then with the Rams. But for the first time in my life, we will not be renewing our season tickets with the Rams.

The Rams have broken my heart year after year, disappointed me, and left me wondering why I spend my money and my time watching them play. It’s been a part of my life since I was three years old.

Unfortunately, recent events have changed all that. I never thought I would stop watching the Rams, but what transpired over the past few weeks was too much to endure.

Stan Kroenke, owner of the Rams, has decided the team will be playing football in Los Angeles soon. While nothing is official yet, the Rams are as good as gone.

Kroenke has the money (he’s one of the richest human beings on the planet, and his wife “Princess Wal-Mart” is worth more than him), he has the land (a however-many-acre plot in Inglewood, California with space not only for a stadium but room to develop parking lots and mini malls to accompany the field and fatten his wallet) and he has the team.

People have tried telling me not to worry—that it’s presumptuous to think the Rams will leave, that there’s no need to fret yet. They say the NFL has ruled out submissions to relocate in 2015—true, but not in 2016. They say the NFL owners wanted to control the LA market and that they don’t trust or like Kroenke. They say the NFL’s own bylaws prohibit a team from re-locating unless they have negotiated “in good faith” with the home city. They say it’s too early to say anything for certain.

Please. To believe the Rams will be in St. Louis in five years is incredibly naïve.

Firstly, the other NFL owners may not like Kroenke, but they do like money. And a team in LA would mean more money for them.

The NFL has owned the LA market for 20 years and done virtually nothing with it. Never before has such a viable owner, location and team been available for relocation.

It’s hard to move a team to Los Angeles; the real-estate market is a mess and the taxes are astronomical. But Kroenke already has the land, and can afford the taxes. They might not like him, but he can make them more money. A team in the second-biggest TV market in the United States will bring in more cash than a team in St. Louis. It’s simple and unfortunate math. If the LA Clippers are worth $2 billion, how high might the Rams’ stock rise if they were to move?

As for the NFL’s bylaws, they aren’t worth the paper they’re printed on. They were designed to keep people from owning professional sports teams in different franchises and thus tamper with different markets.

But the NFL is already making exceptions for Kroenke in terms of their “bylaws.” When Kroenke bought the Rams in 2010, he already owned professional sports teams in another market: Denver. He owns the Avalanche, the Nuggets, and the Major League Soccer team the Rapids. This means Kroenoke has violated the NFL’s cross-ownership laws multiple times.

To get around this, Kroenke bequeathed the teams to his son and daughter. How very generous of him. The NFL didn’t call him on this nonsense (it’s been four years), so to believe he has to negotiate in “good faith” with St. Louis is preposterous.

Besides, he already has a plan to deal with the pesky people who remind him of the relatively strong support in St. Louis. He’s alienated every fan with his plans in LA. The Rams will play 2015 in St. Louis in a nearly-empty dome. And then Kroenke will claim he has no support and will have to leave.

It’s amazing how transparent his plan is, but I’ve seen this movie before. (Maybe you have too—it’s called Major League.) If the NFL does stand up to Kroenke, he won’t hesitate to sue. And the NFL wouldn’t want to face a lawsuit. They’ve had enough bad PR lately.

Kroenke will throw money at the appropriate people (the Spanos family in San Diego comes to mind), and he will get what he wants. Multi-billionaires tend to get that.

And to those who look to Gov. Jay Nixon’s stadium task force leaders Dave Peacock and Bob Blitz to save the day: You need to adjust your expectations. Is it a nice drawing? Yes. But where is the money behind it? It’s mostly public money. If the public is called on to raise taxes to fund a new stadium, (for the second time in 20 years) the initiative will fail.

Furthermore, Peacock has already claimed the stadium needs an investment of at least $200 million from an NFL owner. They won’t get a dime from Kroenke.

Even worse, the city doesn’t even own all of the land necessary for the plan to work, and they plan for the stadium to be publicly operated. Why would Kroenke (who loves money) agree to lease a stadium that isn’t his in a city like St. Louis, when he can own a stadium and all of the amenities around it in a city like Los Angeles? Kroenke made his money in real estate. He buys land. He develops land. He does not lease.

My dad and I left the final Rams game against the Giants a few minutes early. We were rounding a concourse when we saw the Rams block a field goal against New York on the Jumbotron. We had the ball back with only moments remaining. Just the faintest chance of a comeback. I asked my dad if we could stop and see the end of the game. I wanted to see. Even then, I still believed. Maybe the Rams had a miracle up their sleeves.

They didn’t. Shaun Hill fumbled the snap from shotgun and the Giants recovered. I had to laugh. I was such a sucker. But not anymore.

Damn, that dude needs to step back from the ledge.:LOL:
 

blue4

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
3,126
Name
blue4
No chance of a comeback
By Dane Watkins / January 21st, 2015
Between the two of us, my father and I have witnessed nearly every moment of the pitiful pro football on display in St. Louis over the past 55 years, first with the Cardinals, and then with the Rams. But for the first time in my life, we will not be renewing our season tickets with the Rams.

The Rams have broken my heart year after year, disappointed me, and left me wondering why I spend my money and my time watching them play. It’s been a part of my life since I was three years old.

Unfortunately, recent events have changed all that. I never thought I would stop watching the Rams, but what transpired over the past few weeks was too much to endure.

Stan Kroenke, owner of the Rams, has decided the team will be playing football in Los Angeles soon. While nothing is official yet, the Rams are as good as gone.

Kroenke has the money (he’s one of the richest human beings on the planet, and his wife “Princess Wal-Mart” is worth more than him), he has the land (a however-many-acre plot in Inglewood, California with space not only for a stadium but room to develop parking lots and mini malls to accompany the field and fatten his wallet) and he has the team.

People have tried telling me not to worry—that it’s presumptuous to think the Rams will leave, that there’s no need to fret yet. They say the NFL has ruled out submissions to relocate in 2015—true, but not in 2016. They say the NFL owners wanted to control the LA market and that they don’t trust or like Kroenke. They say the NFL’s own bylaws prohibit a team from re-locating unless they have negotiated “in good faith” with the home city. They say it’s too early to say anything for certain.

Please. To believe the Rams will be in St. Louis in five years is incredibly naïve.

Firstly, the other NFL owners may not like Kroenke, but they do like money. And a team in LA would mean more money for them.

The NFL has owned the LA market for 20 years and done virtually nothing with it. Never before has such a viable owner, location and team been available for relocation.

It’s hard to move a team to Los Angeles; the real-estate market is a mess and the taxes are astronomical. But Kroenke already has the land, and can afford the taxes. They might not like him, but he can make them more money. A team in the second-biggest TV market in the United States will bring in more cash than a team in St. Louis. It’s simple and unfortunate math. If the LA Clippers are worth $2 billion, how high might the Rams’ stock rise if they were to move?

As for the NFL’s bylaws, they aren’t worth the paper they’re printed on. They were designed to keep people from owning professional sports teams in different franchises and thus tamper with different markets.

But the NFL is already making exceptions for Kroenke in terms of their “bylaws.” When Kroenke bought the Rams in 2010, he already owned professional sports teams in another market: Denver. He owns the Avalanche, the Nuggets, and the Major League Soccer team the Rapids. This means Kroenoke has violated the NFL’s cross-ownership laws multiple times.

To get around this, Kroenke bequeathed the teams to his son and daughter. How very generous of him. The NFL didn’t call him on this nonsense (it’s been four years), so to believe he has to negotiate in “good faith” with St. Louis is preposterous.

Besides, he already has a plan to deal with the pesky people who remind him of the relatively strong support in St. Louis. He’s alienated every fan with his plans in LA. The Rams will play 2015 in St. Louis in a nearly-empty dome. And then Kroenke will claim he has no support and will have to leave.

It’s amazing how transparent his plan is, but I’ve seen this movie before. (Maybe you have too—it’s called Major League.) If the NFL does stand up to Kroenke, he won’t hesitate to sue. And the NFL wouldn’t want to face a lawsuit. They’ve had enough bad PR lately.

Kroenke will throw money at the appropriate people (the Spanos family in San Diego comes to mind), and he will get what he wants. Multi-billionaires tend to get that.

And to those who look to Gov. Jay Nixon’s stadium task force leaders Dave Peacock and Bob Blitz to save the day: You need to adjust your expectations. Is it a nice drawing? Yes. But where is the money behind it? It’s mostly public money. If the public is called on to raise taxes to fund a new stadium, (for the second time in 20 years) the initiative will fail.

Furthermore, Peacock has already claimed the stadium needs an investment of at least $200 million from an NFL owner. They won’t get a dime from Kroenke.

Even worse, the city doesn’t even own all of the land necessary for the plan to work, and they plan for the stadium to be publicly operated. Why would Kroenke (who loves money) agree to lease a stadium that isn’t his in a city like St. Louis, when he can own a stadium and all of the amenities around it in a city like Los Angeles? Kroenke made his money in real estate. He buys land. He develops land. He does not lease.

My dad and I left the final Rams game against the Giants a few minutes early. We were rounding a concourse when we saw the Rams block a field goal against New York on the Jumbotron. We had the ball back with only moments remaining. Just the faintest chance of a comeback. I asked my dad if we could stop and see the end of the game. I wanted to see. Even then, I still believed. Maybe the Rams had a miracle up their sleeves.

They didn’t. Shaun Hill fumbled the snap from shotgun and the Giants recovered. I had to laugh. I was such a sucker. But not anymore.

I know many people who are season ticket holders and to a man they feel this way. The sad part is that these people want to be fans, want to be at the game. But they feel as if they're not wanted there or like no gives a shit. The main problem is how Demoff handled it. I'm sitting here in my break room at work talking to a friend who has been a ticket holder since 95. He showed me his email account where he and Demoff had corresponded, and he told me they actually spoke once on the phone after my friend blew him up on twitter. Every word was either a half truth or an outright lie. Flat out assured him not to worry, nothing going on at all.
 

Boffo97

Still legal in 17 states!
Joined
Feb 10, 2014
Messages
5,278
Name
Dave
I know many people who are season ticket holders and to a man they feel this way. The sad part is that these people want to be fans, want to be at the game. But they feel as if they're not wanted there or like no gives a crap. The main problem is how Demoff handled it. I'm sitting here in my break room at work talking to a friend who has been a ticket holder since 95. He showed me his email account where he and Demoff had corresponded, and he told me they actually spoke once on the phone after my friend blew him up on twitter. Every word was either a half truth or an outright lie. Flat out assured him not to worry, nothing going on at all.
It's hard to think of a good way to handle something like this, but yeah, so far the Rams' choice of ways to handle this has left much to be desired, and I can't blame St. Louis fans for frustration about it.
 

blue4

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
3,126
Name
blue4
It's hard to think of a good way to handle something like this, but yeah, so far the Rams' choice of ways to handle this has left much to be desired, and I can't blame St. Louis fans for frustration about it.

At least he could have been ambiguous about it. "No one knows for sure, Stan is a private person, we're confident, blah". Anything but "hey buddy don't you worry. And remember to keep that cash coming."

Of course I'm paraphrasing for dramatic effect, but the jist is the same.

Also, you think that last guy was bad talking about the Cardinals and the Rams? My team after the Cardinals left was the Oilers. A team that moved, changed its name, put a silly T on its helmet. The NFL flat out hates me.
 

Angry Ram

Captain RAmerica Original Rammer
Joined
Jul 1, 2010
Messages
18,000
Well, I stayed at that game until the clock read zero. The world is balanced out.
 

mr.stlouis

Legend
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
6,454
Name
Main Hook
Yep, looks like absolutely nothing has changed here. Remember that when nothing new happens, the arguments become redundant on both sides.

Nothing to see here.

But I will like to add that I will be attending at least 6 games with my friend. So that cancels out that manic depressant up above.
 

LosAngelesRams

Hall of Fame
Joined
Mar 11, 2013
Messages
3,092
Whatever happens to them, they better keep those $6 dollar tickets coming through. :ROFLMAO: Thats what I'm talking about!
 

bluecoconuts

Legend
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
13,073
At least he could have been ambiguous about it. "No one knows for sure, Stan is a private person, we're confident, blah". Anything but "hey buddy don't you worry. And remember to keep that cash coming."

Of course I'm paraphrasing for dramatic effect, but the jist is the same.

Also, you think that last guy was bad talking about the Cardinals and the Rams? My team after the Cardinals left was the Oilers. A team that moved, changed its name, put a silly T on its helmet. The NFL flat out hates me.

You seem to have bad luck with teams, might I suggest becoming a fan of the Seahawks, 49ers, or Patriots? Take one for the team, use your bad luck to bring them down for the rest of us.
 

blue4

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
3,126
Name
blue4
You seem to have bad luck with teams, might I suggest becoming a fan of the Seahawks, 49ers, or Patriots? Take one for the team, use your bad luck to bring them down for the rest of us.

The nuclear effect. I couldn't fake it though.
 

RamBill

Legend
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
8,874
Rams owner's stadium plan pushes NFL closer to L.A. return

By Albert Breer
NFL Media reporter

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...s-stadium-plan-pushes-nfl-closer-to-la-return

After two decades away, the NFL is closer than it has ever been to returning to Los Angeles.

And after so many false starts since the Raiders and Rams bolted at the end of the 1994 season, one league source said, "we're beginning to see the goal line."

The early January announcement that Rams owner Stan Kroenke is planning an extravagant Inglewood stadium sent shockwaves through NFL circles, but -- according to those with direct knowledge of the proceedings -- was met with quiet applause at the league office, which has been waiting for a powerful plan like this one to get behind. And despite St. Louis and Missouri officials responding quickly with their own stadium vision, the momentum here has very clearly shifted west.

The bottom line is, this L.A. proposal is not like its predecessors. It's the first led by a team owner, blowing up the league's long-held belief that juggling the task of running a team with managing such a project in the nation's second biggest city would be too big a burden. It's on the largest plot of land of any of the proposed L.A. sites. It's in a more desirable end of the region. It's to be privately funded by a man who can afford it.

It's not done, of course. But the idea that the Rams could be playing at the Rose Bowl, L.A. Coliseum or Dodger Stadium in 2016 and 2017 and in Kroenke's new Southern California football palace in 2018 is not at all far-fetched. In fact, it's trending toward becoming a likelihood.

"It's a bold move by Stan," said one source who has worked with the league on Los Angeles. "Whether it results in a stadium at the site billed by the parties, whether it's the Rams going in, or a different team, or two teams, that much we don't know."

There is more certainty here than meets the eye, though.

According to two involved sources, the Rams presented the project to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell before the December owners meetings in Dallas. As it worked out, that was as Goodell and the league were getting the new personal conduct policy ready for voting. And the plan had always been for the commissioner to turn more attention to L.A. once the policy was done. Suffice it to say, Kroenke gave him plenty to chew on.

Two big steps are expected this week. The Rams will provide notice to St. Louis that they're going year-to-year on their lease before Wednesday's deadline to do so. And they'll likely turn in to the city of Inglewood the 8,500 signatures necessary to set up a public vote, which will most likely take place in the spring, to re-zone the land where the stadium will be built. According to a source, the team already has the signatures in hand.

The 60-acre plot Kroenke bought in January 2014 is approved for a stadium, but the adjacent 238-acre area owned by the Stockbridge Capital Group isn't. Once all 298 acres are zoned properly, shovels can go in the ground.

And therein lies the other difference in Inglewood: the size of the area where the stadium would go up. By comparison, the NFL's largest physical structure, Cowboys Stadium, sits on a plot of just 73 acres.

NFL officials deferred comment on the recent developments to the Rams, who declined to discuss their plans. But no matter how you chop all this up and put it together, St. Louis is on the clock. A St. Louis stadium task force presented its plan to Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon earlier this month. It included the dream of an open-air 64,000-seat stadium on the banks of the Mississippi River that could also potentially be home to a Major League Soccer franchise.

Two things need to happen for that stadium -- which, on paper, isn't as modern as projects in Minneapolis or Atlanta, though that could certainly change -- to go forward, and neither step will be simple. First, the land needs to be acquired. Second, financing needs to be secured, with the expectation being that it'll be a 40-60 public-private split. It's unclear at this point whether it'll take a vote to get there.

How that plays out will determine whether or not the club meets the league's relocation guidelines, which call for a team to demonstrate that the existing market has failed. If the financing includes an eventual public contribution, that will make it tougher for the Rams to qualify for relocation, but if the St. Louis plan does not end up including much public money, that could grease the skids for a move. In any case, the Rams have been less successful than the San Diego Chargers and Oakland Raiders when it comes to demonstrating that their market has failed.

But all of that might not matter. Remember, the league has a huge interest in making Los Angeles work, one way or another, and this project seems to meet the right-team, right-owner, right-stadium threshold.

The way it's been laid out to the clubs, the league wants the L.A. stadium to be an iconic venue that's a sports and entertainment destination. This vast property would satisfy that, with a number of projects expected to pop up on the periphery within the grounds around the team's home, creating a West Coast headquarters of sorts for the league.

Kroenke is also amenable to the idea of having a second team as part of the project, according to a source, which would help the NFL make the most of the effort.

At the very least, Kroenke's bombshell accelerated the L.A. timeline and put pressure on a number of entities with an interest in the market -- on the cities of Los Angeles (proper) and Carson to push their projects forward, on the cities of Oakland, San Diego and St. Louis to ramp up efforts to keep their own teams, and on the Raiders and Chargers to figure out their futures. The movement on the St. Louis stadium effort is proof positive of that.

The NFL does still have some control here. Three-quarters of the owners must vote to approve the move, as is required in the bylaws for relocation, and some league waivers and funding would likely be needed to make the project right. Also, Kroenke still hasn't satisfied the league's cross-ownership rules by divesting himself of the NBA's Denver Nuggets and NHL's Colorado Avalanche, something he has until the end of the calendar year to do.

But what's really important here is much simpler than that: The powers that be on Park Avenue have been waiting a long time for the right roadmap to get back to L.A.

It seems like Kroenke gave it to them.

And if they see it like that, it's unlikely anything will stand in the way.

Follow Albert Breer on Twitter @AlbertBreer.
 

RamBill

Legend
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
8,874

Rams Notify St. Louis They'll Go Year-to-Year on Dome Lease

ST. LOUIS — Jan 26, 2015, 5:07 PM ET

http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/rams-notify-st-louis-year-year-dome-lease-28499252

By R.B. FALLSTROM AP Sports Writer

The St. Louis Rams have notified the St. Louis Convention and Visitors Commission they intended to shift to a year-to-year lease agreement for their use of the Edward Jones Dome.

A spokesman for the Rams and the CVC, which operates the dome, both confirmed the move Monday.

The notification is a potential pretext to a possible move back to Los Angeles, where owner Stan Kroenke has land to build a new stadium. The Rams had until Wednesday to tell the city.

Under terms of a 30-year lease agreement reached in 1995, the Rams had the ability to convert the lease to annual terms if the dome was not deemed among the top 25 percent of NFL stadiums.

———
 

bluecoconuts

Legend
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
13,073
The early January announcement that Rams owner Stan Kroenke is planning an extravagant Inglewood stadium sent shockwaves through NFL circles, but -- according to those with direct knowledge of the proceedings -- was met with quiet applause at the league office, which has been waiting for a powerful plan like this one to get behind.

This is probably the most interesting part of that article, if the league office was quietly happy about the announcement, that's pretty telling.
 

brokeu91

The super shrink
Joined
Jul 10, 2010
Messages
5,546
Name
Michael
Rams Notify St. Louis They'll Go Year-to-Year on Dome Lease
ST. LOUIS — Jan 26, 2015, 5:07 PM ET

http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/rams-notify-st-louis-year-year-dome-lease-28499252

By R.B. FALLSTROM AP Sports Writer

The St. Louis Rams have notified the St. Louis Convention and Visitors Commission they intended to shift to a year-to-year lease agreement for their use of the Edward Jones Dome.

A spokesman for the Rams and the CVC, which operates the dome, both confirmed the move Monday.

The notification is a potential pretext to a possible move back to Los Angeles, where owner Stan Kroenke has land to build a new stadium. The Rams had until Wednesday to tell the city.

Under terms of a 30-year lease agreement reached in 1995, the Rams had the ability to convert the lease to annual terms if the dome was not deemed among the top 25 percent of NFL stadiums.

———
I thought this already happened
 
Status
Not open for further replies.