New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[beej]

It's actually probably like 1.02 billion but 998 sounds better but it doesn't matter as long as they get the money.

probably. which makes me wonder, "does Grubman ever pay for his own lunch?"

 

[dieterbrock]

998 just looks less than 1 Billion....

 

[Rmfnlt]

probably. which makes me wonder, "does Grubman ever pay for his own lunch?"

Right! And... The Four Seasons, no less! Ain't nobody starving in this group!

Hell, had they just went to some toasted raviloi place, they would have made up the couple millions we're talking about!

Regarding staying under a billion... interesting... to some, a "billion dollar stadium" might sound more pretigious than a $998 million dollar one.

Guess it depends on how much Joe Citizen has to pay... I know when Jerruh built his, the price tag was a badge of honor for him and his fans. "We spared no expense!!" They ate it up! Of course, I don't think they paid for much - if any of it.

 

[LosAngelesRams]

All this millions talk, can I just get 1 million?

 

[TD2]

So i have watched this thread for a while now, but finally decided to post.

This notion that Kroenke is a good owner is a bit surprising to me. Here in CO, he is very disliked. Avalanche and the Nuggets have been turned into third tier franchises and it never seems like it matters to the kroenke family. He beefs with local fishermen fishing in his giant lake that he bought. There are numorous things that have happened. If we people in CO can get pissed off about small stuff like that, i think the local st. louis residents have a serious gripe that should not be shrugged off.

I have seen people say that he wishes to buy the Broncos. As a Rams/Broncos fan. I can only hope that will never happen.

I think the team stays in St. Louis. You just don't abandon a struggling city for the dry desert of LA. Kroenke only sees green, but i think the NFL may see a bit more and care about the city of St. Louis after what it took for the city to finally get a team again, and that is why i feel they will stay.

I have posted several time over the past two years that Kroenke is only interested in the business of his sports teams, not the win-loss records. He has done well in St. Louis with the Rams in having Fisher & Snead to bring a team with the worst roster in the NFL to a good roster. This is just good business. But once the Rams can get to the 8-10 win level consistently he will not be worried about more wins. Because 8-10 wins will keep the stands full. And that is all that matters. Doesn't make any difference if it is in St. Louis or LA. Check out all of his teams. None go beyond average on a long term basis.

 

[dbrooks25]

And remember Peacock is committed to keeping St. Louis an NFL city, so he's got more than one way to win.

After all, he did say this: "I think (Kroenke) is really committed to Los Angeles.”

He might be playing a different game than we all realize...

Peacock has always and continues to say keeping the Rams in St. Louis is the priority. Keeping the Rams is part of keeping St. Louis an NFL city.

 

[OldSchool]

This notion that Kroenke is a good owner is a bit surprising to me. Here in CO, he is very disliked. Avalanche and the Nuggets have been turned into third tier franchises and it never seems like it matters to the kroenke family. He beefs with local fishermen fishing in his giant lake that he bought. There are numorous things that have happened. If we people in CO can get pissed off about small stuff like that, i think the local st. louis residents have a serious gripe that should not be shrugged off.

He hires football people to do the football jobs and pays them top notch. He doesn't get in the way of the sports people doing their job. He allows them to spend to the fullest extent of the salary cap. His stadium plan in Inglewood is with no public money. Aside from people in St Louis not liking the possible relocation what is there not to like? He spends his money on the team and lets the sports people do their jobs. I don't know about the Avalanche or Nuggets because I don't follow them but I can't think of anything he does with the Rams that upsets me personally. He also spends the money needed to help Arsenal along.

 

[RAMSinLA]

Just the size of the fan base in St Louis suggest it is an NFL city but so is Los Angeles. Which team ends up in LA? We will find out in February. I care more about this season and seeing the Rams field a team we all can be proud of once again. I'm excited as hell about our new look Rams!
I'm not saying they will be playing in the SB but I really believe they will be a team that can win. How great will that be for a change?

 

[iced]

865 to 985 was the original

going back to January 11 - $985

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_0b74d08b-1231-5f28-8d3d-6953dfa4f09d.html

 

[iced]

He allows them to spend to the fullest extent of the salary cap.

irrelevant when it comes to football - owners are required to spend a minimum amount

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/...ncy-this-offseason-20150305-story.html#page=1

However, the tide might be turning this offseason because of a little known poison pill called the “minimum spending floor,” which requires every NFL team to average spending at least 89% up to the salary cap floor from 2011 to 2016

 

[OldSchool]

irrelevant when it comes to football - owners are required to spend a minimum amount

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/...ncy-this-offseason-20150305-story.html#page=1

It is relevant as that's been in effect since 2011. There are some teams that had to spend a lot of money this year or they were facing some serious penalties.

 

[OldSchool]

going back to January 11 - $985

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_0b74d08b-1231-5f28-8d3d-6953dfa4f09d.html

Going back to January 9, 2015 860-985 million.

http://nextstl.com/2015/01/st-louis-strikes-back-nfl-proposal-riverfront-stadium-unveiled/

 

[iced]

It is relevant as that's been in effect since 2011. There are some teams that had to spend a lot of money this year or they were facing some serious penalties.

which is exactly why its irrelevant...teams are forced to spend a certain amount...

Going back to January 9, 2015 860-985 million.

http://nextstl.com/2015/01/st-louis-strikes-back-nfl-proposal-riverfront-stadium-unveiled/

And 1 billion here, february..

http://www.kansascity.com/opinion/editorials/article10541516.html

Many officials there hope Nixon and the General Assembly will be open to offering a large package of financial incentives to help build a $1 billion riverfront stadium for a National Football League team. It’s all part of the suddenly desperate bid to keep the St. Louis Rams in town, even though owner Stan Kroenke is involved in a stadium-building effort near Los Angeles.

all i was pointing out is that since then ^, and particularly during the little financing details Peacock has talked about, its always been up in the $986 million range. This isn't news really - and the cost hasn't gone up a lot, yet. I expect it too...which is why I thought Goldman Sachs assisting in the financing convo was interesting

 

[bluecoconuts]

irrelevant when it comes to football - owners are required to spend a minimum amount

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/...ncy-this-offseason-20150305-story.html#page=1

I don't see how it's not relevant? The NBA and NHL also have salary cap floors, and both the Nuggets and Avalanche spend pretty close to the cap ceiling. They don't have issues spending with getting money to spend, and Kroenke wasn't exactly pulling the trigger on the Ryan O'Reilly trade or anything like that.

 

[OldSchool]

which is exactly why its irrelevant...teams are forced to spend a certain amount...

Is there a minimum teams have to spend to avoid the penalties? Yes there is and are the Rams spending just the minimum to avoid the penalties? No they're not they're spending pretty darned close to the cap. My original point was the owner allows the front office to spend money. If he was a frugal guy like say Mark Davis he would tell them to pay just a fraction over the minimum to avoid the fines. Raiders the first year this rule was in affect spent only 69% of the cap and last year they spent only 89% of the cap. As a result the Raiders need to spend 99.3% of the cap each of the next two years minimum or they will have to write checks to all their players for that 4 year period the difference in what they spent and what they should have spent.

That is the point of what I said, our owner doesn't mess with the possibility of that penalty he allows the team to spend their cap. Under Stan the lowest percentage of the cap we've spent was 86.4%, his first year as owner(There was a $3.5 million rollover from the previous year for money unspent.). 2013 we were actually over the cap and in 2014 we spent $131,556,332 of our $131,823,529 cap we left a grand total of $267k.

I don't see how it's not relevant? The NBA and NHL also have salary cap floors, and both the Nuggets and Avalanche spend pretty close to the cap ceiling. They don't have issues spending with getting money to spend, and Kroenke wasn't exactly pulling the trigger on the Ryan O'Reilly trade or anything like that.

Last year the Avalanche spent $67 million of a $69 million cap. The Nuggets, though I'm not as up to snuff on the NBA cap intricacies, spent $2 million over the cap. But they had $9 million in cap holds though I'm not sure how that really affected the final cap. They did come in under the luxury tax threshold.

 

[blue4]

So i have watched this thread for a while now, but finally decided to post.

This notion that Kroenke is a good owner is a bit surprising to me. Here in CO, he is very disliked. Avalanche and the Nuggets have been turned into third tier franchises and it never seems like it matters to the kroenke family. He beefs with local fishermen fishing in his giant lake that he bought. There are numorous things that have happened. If we people in CO can get pissed off about small stuff like that, i think the local st. louis residents have a serious gripe that should not be shrugged off.

I have seen people say that he wishes to buy the Broncos. As a Rams/Broncos fan. I can only hope that will never happen.

I think the team stays in St. Louis. You just dont abandon a struggling city for the dry desert of LA. Kroenke only sees green, but i think the NFL may see a bit more and care about the city of St. Louis after what it took for the city to finally get a team again, and that is why i feel they will stay.

Does the Denver media think much of the rumors that Stan wants the Broncos? I think you're pretty safe from that.

 

[dieterbrock]

going back to January 11 - $985

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_0b74d08b-1231-5f28-8d3d-6953dfa4f09d.html

From the article you posted, "The 90-acre facility would cost between $860 million and $985 million, the plan estimated."

Its all semantics but considering the funding hasnt been mapped out, and requires a hefty chunk from the owner who seemingly has other plans, its a little unsettling to watch this go over 1 billion already. Imagine what happens once they actually break ground

 

[dieterbrock]

Does the Denver media think much of the rumors that Stan wants the Broncos? I think you're pretty safe from that.

I havent seen any indication that Stan "wants the Broncos". Unless I missed something, the only reason he's connected to the Broncs is because he owns the other 2 teams. I havent seen Kroenke give 2 chits about the bogus cross ownership rule, so I dont see what makes the Broncs an allure. IMO the only connection between the two is pure media speculation.

 

[OldSchool]

I havent seen any indication that Stan "wants the Broncos". Unless I missed something, the only reason he's connected to the Broncs is because he owns the other 2 teams. I havent seen Kroenke give 2 chits about the bogus cross ownership rule, so I dont see what makes the Broncs an allure. IMO the only connection between the two is pure media speculation.

It's all speculation, it ties in well with certain media hypothesis but nobody has anything concrete to base it on.

 

[RamBill]

Strauss: Not a Done Deal Rams Leave St. Louis
Joe Strauss of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch joined The Ryan Kelley Morning After on Friday to discuss a number of local sports topics, including Dave Peacock and company’s recent stadium meeting with NFL brass.

Listen to Strauss Talk Rams

=============

Thoughts on the Peacock/NFL meeting?

"Sounds like part of the process. I didn't read any specifics of advancement..but just this is part of the process and everything seems to be on the proper track. Financing still needs to be secured. There are no red flags, which I guess is good news. But there's still potential complications involving law suits, local referendums. I think everybody's waiting to see how that plays out."

Do you think it's a matter of time before the Rams announce they're moving?

"I think some people perceive that as a foregone conclusion. I'm not in that camps. I think there's a lot of political sway behind the Oakland-San Diego project. Where that leaves Kroenke is a legitimate question. I don't think it's a done deal the Rams are out of here as much as some people present it that way."

More on Kroenke:

"Is Kroenke going to build a stadium if the NFL assigns two teams to Carson? I don't (believe that). There's a lot of things in flux here. The narrative has become so strong (that Kroenke's a bad guy and wants the team out of here and they're gone). Maybe all that's correct, but I don't think you can assume that. Certainly what's going on locally in terms of the new stadium proposal...would suggest this thing is still in play. Where are people getting their information where the team is gone? Perhaps the Rams will move...I think there's a lot of ballgame to be played here. It's a bit presumptuous to think the end game is obvious."