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.

The Ripper

Starter
Joined
Apr 25, 2015
Messages
794
Name
Rip
lmao okay

What team that has used LA as a threat has had anything viable in LA? There isn't one. The Vikings had nothing no temp stadium and no agreement on a permanent facility. The same goes for the Seahwaks and the Colts.

For a threat to be real it needs to be actionable.
 

MrMotes

Starter
Joined
May 6, 2014
Messages
954
Of course we can look at his actions and assume one thing or another, but can any of us 100% say we actually know what he wants?

Agreed. But just about everyone covering the story or working on stadium issues believes he wants to go. So not 100%, but seems pretty likely that's the situation. Even if he publicly says he intends to move of files for relocation some will still see it as possibly leverage...
 

The Ripper

Starter
Joined
Apr 25, 2015
Messages
794
Name
Rip
lmao okay

I forgot Kroenke was the first owner to do it in the last 20 years, and that the NFL isn't going to charge other owners give up their leverage

In the last 20 years has any owner before Kroenke spent any money to make a move to LA?

Not talking about flying in for lunch at Gladestone's.
 

Angry Ram

Captain RAmerica Original Rammer
Joined
Jul 1, 2010
Messages
18,000
Mayor Butts has been on the radio multiple times and it has been discussed at the multiple city council meetings.

I think I'll just wait until it officially been said Rams are staying or leaving.

I want to believe the former, but having doubts.
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
I think you missed the point of my post.

It was in answer to those who say the only people who think Kroenke intends to move are Bernie types. Every reporter covering the story (in L.A. and St. Louis) plus many city officials (including the one i quoted) believes Kroenke wants to move.

It's not just click bait...

Being that they have no official source, it's click bait. If you want me to show you a history of all of these news sights using sensationalism as click bait, I will. Name the site.
 

MrMotes

Starter
Joined
May 6, 2014
Messages
954
Being that they have no official source, it's click bait. If you want me to show you a history of all of these news sights using sensationalism as click bait, I will. Name the site.

I showed you quotes from Dave Peacock and Andrew Leonard, chairman of the CVC...
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
No, in fact reporting that Demoff gave one of the presentations is a somewhat new development. At any rate coming up there's an owners only meeting, meaning Demoff wont even be invited, and Kroenke will be pitching Inglewood again there. Both of them have been doing it.

That relates to Peacock, but there are plenty of others who have no dog in this fight who have said it's the case. It just makes no sense that they would all be making crap up for shits and giggles. Why would NFL executives or even other owners mention it? What does it help them?

To be honest at this point it seems like the goal is just to be intentionally difficult. First it was "Well Kroenke hasn't actually said anything" and then after tons of articles and reporters saying they do it was "Well the Rams aren't linked to Inglewood" and then they were linked via Demoff and then it was "Well it's just a leverage thing" and after tons of articles and reporters saying that's not the case, now it's back to "Well Kroenke hasn't said anything, and I refuse to believe it unless he says it despite all the evidence of the contrary." At this point I'm waiting for the word the Rams are leaving and people to say "Well the moving trucks haven't come yet" and when they come "Well they haven't played a game yet" etc etc.

If they move or not, is anyone's guess, but at this point in the game we shouldn't be wondering if they actually want to move, because there's tons of articles that say they do.

You're assuming there will be an Inglewood pitch and that Kroenke will pitch it.

You assume a lot of things based on rumor.

You have not presented, at least to me, a single person from the Rams saying they intend to move.

Reporters say lots of things. Reporters guess and repeat rumors. I have never heard a single reporter say they KNOW for a FACT the Rams intend to move. If one has, I would love to know who it is.

I love you as a ROD brother, but until it's fact, it's not.

FACTS: Kroenke wanted an updated dome. He didn't get what he asked for. He then bought into an investment group in Inglewood. STL is dead set on building a new stadium. The NFL has to approve a move and that move has NOT been requested and NO person within the organization has stated in any way that a request to move is forthcoming.

Do Bernie and LA papers act like it's a fact that they want to move? Yes. Is that an actual fact? No.
 
Last edited:

The Ripper

Starter
Joined
Apr 25, 2015
Messages
794
Name
Rip
You're assuming there will be an Inglewood pitch and that Kroenke will pitch it.

You assume a lot of things based on rumor.

You have not presented, at least to me, a single person from the Rams saying they intend to move.

Reporters say lots of things. Reporters guess and repeat rumors. I have never heard a single reporter say they KNOW for a FACT the Rams intend to move. If one has, I would love to know who it is.

I love you as a ROD brother, but until it's fact, it's not.

No rumor on the upcoming owners meetings. The agenda was released and there will be presentations on both LA sites. The meeting is only for owners and one family member.
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
No rumor on the upcoming owners meetings. The agenda was released and there will be presentations on both LA sites. The meeting is only for owners and one family member.

When it happens, it will be fact. And when Kroenke pitches it, it will be fact. If he does, I will have no problem with it. Until he does, it's just an agenda. If he doesn't propose it as a Rams sight, it will just be a real estate project with a proposed stadium by a real estate investment group. Drawings are just drawings. Rumors are just rumors. Conjecture is just conjecture.

Then it still has to be approved.

At this time, the Rams have not even indicated in any way they intend to move. Let me know when that changes.
 

blue4

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
3,126
Name
blue4
Read on Twitter that the team has people confiscating posters at the gates for the NFL network live camp broadcast today. Apparently they don't want pro St. Louis "propaganda" representing the team today.

I wonder what we can expect from the Oxnard broadcast...

You can expect to see plenty of pro LA signs.
 

blue4

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
3,126
Name
blue4
The notion of using LA as leverage is just a fallacy. Not one owner that has threatened to go to LA has had a viable stadium or even a temporary one so none of them could even apply for relocation. The threat was only to scare the public.

The rest on the ROI is more than just speculation and it's right on. There has to be a reason why that part of the plan has remained secret since that part is just as important as the financing. The numbers are probably weighted towards Kroenke and I don't think they want that released.

Scaring the public is using LA as leverage. Its the definition of leverage. Rams aren't using LA for leverage, they want to move. There's a difference.
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
For the general discussion:

If the Rams want to move, so be it.

If the NFL lets them move, so be it.

I don't like it and I think the NFL would be horribly wrong, but, so be it. I won't abandon my team, just as some LA fans didn't, but I'll hate the owner and NFL for letting it happen over potential profits.

Trying to convince me that Kroenke WANTS to move, plan A, will never work because their is no actual testimony or actions that prove that to be the case. Every statement he has EVER made publicly is pro saint louis and staying here. EVER.

Demoff has NEVER stated the team wants to move. EVER.

ALL other statements otherwise by other people are conjecture.

Read into it what you want. Project what you want or what they want you to project. The facts are undeniable. NO action has been made to move the Rams. No request, no announcements of an intention to request, and no rejection of the new stadium. In fact, the Rams have helped with the new design.

The Rams wanted a better venue and they didn't get what they asked for. Now they are getting way more than they asked for. That's where we are. The rest is investments, posing, paper, and conjecture.

I respect the fact that LA wants the Rams back. It's an honor that they want them more than the CA local teams who's cities don't support them with new stadiums. But I, even from an objective point of view, don't see Kronke, a local MO native and advocate of the NFL and Rams in saint louis, or the NFL, an advocate of keeping teams in cities that support them, moving the Rams.

If they do, I will still be a fan of the team and players, but I will lose all respect for the NFL. Failing LA 20 years ago is no reason to fail STL now. We have supported one of the worst teams in the last decade. We EARNED our NFL city respect.
 

bluecoconuts

Legend
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
13,073
You're assuming there will be an Inglewood pitch and that Kroenke will pitch it.

You assume a lot of things based on rumor.

You have not presented, at least to me, a single person from the Rams saying they intend to move.

Reporters say lots of things. Reporters guess and repeat rumors. I have never heard a single reporter say they KNOW for a FACT the Rams intend to move. If one has, I would love to know who it is.

I love you as a ROD brother, but until it's fact, it's not.

FACTS: Kroenke wanted an updated dome. He didn't get what he asked for. He then bought into an investment group in Inglewood. STL is dead set on building a new stadium. The NFL has to approve a move and that move has NOT been requested and NO person within the organization has stated in any way that a request to move is forthcoming.

Do Bernie and LA papers act like it's a fact that they want to move? Yes. Is that an actual fact? No.

There will be an Inglewood pitch, it's on the schedule. Kroenke is the only one able to pitch it because he's the only one able to go. Again, I feel as if this goes back to the whole "intentionally being difficult thing" we're going "well we don't actually know what he wants because he hasn't said it"

He doesn't say anything.

I mean you can say that about anything. Take politics for example, do we actually know what they think? They're politicians they lie all the time. What about our parents, they lied about Santa Clause or the Tooth Fairy, so we've established they are willing to lie, so do we actually know what they think or want? Even if they say if can we really trust them? Can we trust anyone? Anyone can say anything, that's where the entire thing of actions speak louder than words. Kroenke hasn't said jack shit, but his actions all scream pretty loudly. Yes he could use it for something else, he's a smart man, he's made a lot of money doing this, he knows to give himself plenty of options, no businessman worth a shit would leave themselves without options.

Spanos has said he wants to stay in San Diego, does anyone really believe that? When he goes and shits over everything that comes up? People say that owners use LA for leverage all the time, so because they said they wanted to move to LA we are to believe that they legitimately wanted to move? Or was it for leverage?

Just because Kroenke hasn't stepped up to the microphone doesn't mean that he hasn't made his intentions clear. He has spoken about it to his fellow owners, to the people he has partnered up with, to Demoff, essentially every action he has made, from purchasing the land, to spending money to speed up the timetable, to making sure that all EJD contracts end at the same time early next year, indicate he would like to move.

I'm sorry, but I don't buy that just because Kroenke hasn't actually said it himself we can't assume it's true. Sure we can't say that it's fact, but there is very little that we can say is fact. I can safely say that what he has done, and what others who have sources that have been there to hear it, should be good enough. It's good enough for the reporters, for the task force, and for the other owners, it's good enough for me.
 

bluecoconuts

Legend
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
13,073
Now they are getting way more than they asked for. That's where we are.

Are they? There has been talks about this, does the Riverfront Stadium put them in the Top Tier stadium? I think it could with tweaks, but right now? There is some indications that it does not. Which means he's not getting what he wanted, a top tier stadium, and likely a Super Bowl capable stadium.
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
What team that has used LA as a threat has had anything viable in LA? There isn't one. The Vikings had nothing no temp stadium and no agreement on a permanent facility. The same goes for the Seahwaks and the Colts.

For a threat to be real it needs to be actionable.

A treat has to be actionable to be a threat?! Come on dude, get real. The other party only has to PERCEIVE it as actionable.

I threaten businesses with the loss of my business all the time, and they act, with no idea if I really could or would do what I say. It's how I get Sunday Ticket every season for free.
 

RAGRam

Pro Bowler
Joined
Mar 14, 2015
Messages
1,150
Read on Twitter that the team has people confiscating posters at the gates for the NFL network live camp broadcast today. Apparently they don't want pro St. Louis "propaganda" representing the team today.

I wonder what we can expect from the Oxnard broadcast...

I've never been to training camp, so can only repeat information on policy, but apparently the Rams have a "no signs over a particular size regardless of content" policy, rather than a "no pro St. Louis propaganda" policy, if true it's just another example of something relatively minor swinging the big pendulum massively.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.