i also wonder what there people were saying when Georgia did the exact same thing? she didnt like what was offered so she left, but she is a super villion, Stan does it and he is a hero. biased much?
Nah - I think you have top admit that Georgia was a super hero in the Lou 20 years ago. So the shoe is simply on the other foot and I think most here recognize that Stan shouldn't be loved by St Louis fans right now because of the possible relocation and that he has done nothing lately to assure them he even wants to stay. What fan base wouldn't be pissed at that?
you want details on Chargers and Raiders? ok, niether city has a suitable stadium plan, St Louis does, easy enough.
No. Not easy enough. We really don't know that St Louis has a suitable stadium plan. They seem to be doing good things and moving forward but no one has a known suitable plan. Wish they did but they don't.
and yet you gloss over the fact that the Chargers have been looking for a new stadium for at least 10 years now, and still have nothing acceptable. gloss over the fact that St Louis has stepped up and have a stadium planned that the NFL has said is a very good one, ever heard that about SD?
I never glossed over any of that. But there is more going on than just what is going on in St Louis. The NFL has said many of the same things to all the markets. That is probably not going to change until someone is named the winner of the LA sweepstakes. I have all along brought up what St Louis is doing and what is and isn't being said. Try that on someone else. But if someone wants to say that St Louis has X going for it that none of the others do, and I know otherwise, I'm going to bring it up. It has nothing to do with sides to me - just an open and honest debate or discussion.
This thread is pretty hilarious if you think about it. From my recollection of all the posts I have read through, it seems that pro L.A. folks are on offense and pro Stl people are on defense. That's my take on it, anyway. Can't wait for this to be over. :X3:
I don't really disagree with you here. But I think it is the logical nature of the dilemma. And I really agree with your last sentence.
ok so now you can speculate, but others cant? tell me anything you have heard that says Oakland has an acceptable plan, you cant because there is none.
Is there much here that is not speculation? I don't recall anyone saying anyone else can't speculate but maybe I missed it. I think we all see Oakland as being behind on putting together a workable plan but no one has an accepted plan so therefore we really don't know if any of them are acceptable. From my view, it would seem that St Louis is a fair amount ahead of SD which is a fair amount ahead of Oak. But that could be dead wrong or just meaningless if any one of the proposals is actually acceptable by owners and/or the NFL or for that matter, unacceptable.
I know the theme is that if St Louis secures financing they should keep the Rams. But there is very likely way more to it than just that in order for the plan to be "acceptable". And I don't even think any of us know what THAT may be either.
Ripper you know this well, and I am not arguing that the lease could not be ended, the fact is both sides were well inside their rights....nothing illegal or nefarious has occurred.
1. St. Louis did not violate the contract...they were aware of an escape clause and did not do what needed to be done to close it...but that is NOT violating or breaking the contract
2. Their is no evidence that St. Louis, when they entered the contract , did not know they wouldn't be able to meet this clause...not sure anyone could have foresaw the proliferation and growth/change in stadiums since the Ed was built. Not I am not saying that they didn't realize long ago that this clause would be an issue....just saying no evidence that they knew it at the time the contract was signed
3. It wasn't decided by a judge (at least not one acting as a judge at the time) but by an arbitration panel. It still was a bidding decision, but it wasn't legal decision (note I am not saying that it was illegal I am just saying it by it self did not have any governmental weight behind it)
I agree that there was nothing illegal or nefarious but I don't agree that the CVC's actions in all of this will be deemed meaningless just because St Louis is wanting to build something new. I just have to think the NFL will consider it and in no small measure.
do i really need to see all these SD proposals to know the NFL has said none were good enough? no matter the reason, they havent satisfied the NFL. the Chargers are stopping SD from building a stadium? hmm St Louis has an owner who has done just about everything to say he is leaving yet we go forward with stadium plans? tell me again whats stopping SD from doing the same.
Apparently SD
IS doing the same and moving forward without the Chargers help or acceptance. St Louis started a little earlier in this round of proposals but the NFL has suggested that both cities go forward and in SD's case in spite of Fabiani trying to lay waste to the proposal.
I'm really trying to see the big difference between the SD and St Louis proposals at this point. It seems that St Louis is about a month ahead but other than that, the similarities seem greater than the differences.
Is this situation/problem going to be settled before the season is well played out?
I doubt it. Sure would be nice though.
I think what's frustrating are those of us in the middle. Seems that if we criticze St Louis, it means pro-LA.
I don't have any criticism of Kroenke because I have nothing to go on. And Carson to me is a joke
I have been hit with PMs from both angles. If I suspend or block anyone from the thread and they are pro LA, I hear from them that I am being unfair to them and always taking St Louis' side. If I do the other, I get it from the St Louis side. So I can only suggest we don't get overly offended because LA fans would like our team back or vise verse.
Specifically what makes us behind?
I don't think he said St Louis was behind. Just maybe not as far ahead as some in St Louis suggest.
Dude, please. You're stating things we all know around here. St. Louis is ahead, regardless of what you believe. Once this court thing is done, all of that will fall into place.
Hopefully so but I personally don't see that as the only hurdle remaining in this race.
so in other words, you're not reading (or ignoring) the other 10,000 posts on this thread.
No. I don't think he is saying or doing that at all. Please don't play that game. No doubt he is looking at it from his perspective as many others are here. Because he sees the tea leaves saying something different, doesn't mean he is ignoring or not reading what others have posted.
That's cool, believe what you want. I will believe what is being reported to the people of St. Louis by Mr. Peacock, and he is a guy with a proven track record who is worth believing. And before you go there, no, he didn't say St. Louis was ahead of San Diego.
I think that is really what is going on. Some will put more credence in areas or sources that match their opinion. Seems pretty natural.
theres plenty of information out there yes, and none of it has a stadium plan that they can agree on,
seems to me the NFL keeps saying that St Louis is doing everything they ask them to do, so i would say your wrong there.
lol, and Stan buying land and stating his desire to move to LA helps St Louis how?
not the same at all, St Louis is going forward with things, SD is stuck in nuetral like they have been for a decade.
Sorry Tony but this doesn't seem to mesh with what the NFL is telling SD lately.
Alrighty then. We'll just go with that then. St Louis is behind EVERYbody else.
When did he say this?
I feel like I am defending Ripper and I'm not. I am just defending the latitude for members to see things different than others. I will say though that it seems he is being ganged up on just because he doesn't agree with what many in St Louis hold to be the real truth. I still see potential pitfalls beyond the court cases. It doesn't mean I am ignoring everything else.
We'll see how that vote in January will work out for them.
Indeed.
uhhh... because we get tired of explaining it to you every monday and thursday...
what else do you wanna talk about. The weather. I think St Louis is behind San diego in rain fall too.
Not one of your better posts IMO.
Good lord. I step away from the thread for a day or two and St. Louis has fallen behind SD and Stan Kroenke has been awarded owner of the year. Think I'll step back out.
Aren't you worried about missing the pink elephants and flying monkeys?
Oh, they will be actionable. You're waiting on the inevitable before saying they have something. That's fine, but it will most likely get done.
Again - I hope you're right but I can understand not seeing it as a done deal until it's done.
