New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[Rmfnlt]

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.

Closed meeting, probably. As in no press. Probably like the previous owner's meetings.

So, the only way for information to come out is via comments made by the attendees.

Watch how it gets "reported". Watch how far reaching some of the "reports" get.

 

[badnews]

I sure wish the story was about the Rams threatening to move to Maine or something...
..that way we could all be on the same side again....

 

[blue4]

Well said.

Each of us has a choice right now... we can either look at facts (things that have actually been said by Kroenke or actual things that have happened) or read all the media guesses and draw some conclusion.

I prefer to look at what has been said by Kroenke (which is nothing - means everything is still on the table.)

I really coouldn't give a damn about what the L.A. Times, STL PD , Farmer, Miklasz or any of them have to say. Every one of them has an agenda and will "report" in such a way as to forward that agenda. Not once have they reported anything about Kroenke and used actual quotation marks. Why? Because they haven't heard him say a word and know that using quotation marks would get them sued.

Their guesses are not any better than the guesses by members here... I just don't want to guess.

What?! Even the prestigious LA Times?

 

[Rmfnlt]

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

Why is pointing out facts being 'intentionally difficult"? You have debated just about everything written in this thread. No one called you intentionally difficult. There seems to be a double standard here.

Kroenke hasn't said jack crap, but his actions all scream pretty loudly.

And what have those actions been? I think what he has done is... partnered with The Stockbridge Group to buy some land in Inglewood. Started some infrastructure and obtained some permits. For what? We don't know. Those are his actions. The rest is what the media is reporting. That's the facts.

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 crap would leave themselves without options.

Yes... and until he actually speaks, all of those options are open. I think we agree.

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.

Well, that is a fact, though. Until he does say something, it's not factual. You don't have to "buy it" but it's true nonetheless.

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.

What's "good enough" for you to "buy it" may not be good enough for me or others. But let's not categorize people who do not "buy it" as intentionally difficult.
I'm sorry too... I don't buy into believing what the media reports as fact without actually hearing from the utlimate source... and I don't buy into the concept that, just because they keep writing the same things over and over again, it somehow magically becomes fact. In fact, I have a healthy skepticism when it comes to the media... and I suspect many Americans do as well.

 

[Rmfnlt]

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"

Wow, you are confused here.

Comparing it to the Vikings is laughable.

I think I'm done with this for a while (again).

 

[OldSchool]

Lol and the games continue, LA Times reports something it's rumor and guesses. The Post Dispatch reports something write it down as the gospel truth!

 

[OldSchool]

Closed meeting, probably. As in no press. Probably like the previous owner's meetings.

So, the only way for information to come out is via comments made by the attendees.

Watch how it gets "reported". Watch how far reaching some of the "reports" get.

So if an owner comes out of the meeting and tells a reporter something you're not going to believe it?

 

[Rmfnlt]

Lol and the games continue, LA Times reports something it's rumor and guesses. The Post Dispatch reports something write it down as the gospel truth!

I have not said anything of the sort.

 

[Rmfnlt]

So if an owner comes out of the meeting and tells a reporter something you're not going to believe it?

Unless there are quotes? It's a reporters interpretation of what was said... he/she is free to report it any way they want. And, they do.

OK.. this time I really am out.

 

[bubbaramfan]

I can understand the sign thing an pee pee people off. Seems like people are at the tipping point.

I just keep flip flopping. On one hand St. Louis has a stadium plan that gets updated, timelines, railroad collaboration, getting construction set, clearing various legal issues, getting financing almost securing financing, and the Rams seemingly don't have any ill will toward that (compared to San Diego/Oakland and their teams). And with each passing day, there is no news regarding updates to the Stan Kroenke Inglewood site. I mean, if they were really into a new stadium wouldn't it have been updated and tweaked even just a little by now? I mean it's been about 4 months since we first heard that, and nothing to suggest since. No NFL contact, no construction timeline, etc. Instead all we get from the LA area is a San Diego/Chargers bickering contest.

Of course on the other hand, Stan Kroenke could just be waiting to make his move. Literally.

 

[bubbaramfan]

It will be interesting to see if they let me bring in my "Bring Back The Rams" sign when I go to Oxnard next week.

 

[bluecoconuts]

how? so far he has a tract of land, is there a stadium going up we dont know about? he bought an attractive parcel of land, you do know thats what developers do right? he has all kinds of land in Montana, does that mean he is moving there too?

No, those two things aren't related at all. Its not that he bought land, its that he has designed a stadium for that land, prepped the land, spent money to speed up approval for a stadium. The question was has Stan spent money on moving to LA, the answer is yes. He could take what he has spent as a loss and not move, but he has still spent money.

 

[dbrooks25]

It will be interesting to see if they let me bring in my "Bring Back The Rams" sign when I go to Oxnard next week.

If it is a small sign, they most likely will. The true barometer is if they let you in with a poster board sized sign. They allowed small signs into the session yesterday. As a matter of fact, their policies have always been not to allow large signs into practice well before this fiasco started.

Side Note: I have always found signage stupid as hell, no matter what the reason. Just my opinion.

 

[RamzFanz]

He hasn't said he supports the Riverfront stadium either, yet you're saying they do.

The Rams have said they support the new stadium and they have participated in the design. Why would you deny these facts?

 

[MrMotes]

It will be interesting to see if they let me bring in my "Bring Back The Rams" sign when I go to Oxnard next week.

The Rams don't own the Oxnard site like they do their own training facility. They may not be the ones making the rules for Oxnard.

But i gotta say, i don't want someone with a big ass sign in front of me blocking my view...

 

[MrMotes]

View: https://twitter.com/nwagoner/status/629684955375882240

 

[blue4]

If it is a small sign, they most likely will. The true barometer is if they let you in with a poster board sized sign. They allowed small signs into the session yesterday. As a matter of fact, their policies have always been not to allow large signs into practice well before this fiasco started.

Side Note: I have always found signage stupid as hell, no matter what the reason. Just my opinion.

The only way Stan would care about my sign is if it came with money attached.

 

[bluecoconuts]

The Rams have said they support the new stadium and they have participated in the design. Why would you deny these facts?

Kroenke has said he's in support of the Riverfront stadium? I know that Demoff has thrown in input, but as far as I know that's about it.

 

[ChrisW]

Kroenke has said he's in support of the Riverfront stadium? I know that Demoff has thrown in input, but as far as I know that's about it.

The Rams support the EFFORTS of the new stadium. I think that's a key word that's missing from @RamzFanz post. This has been quoted, I think, 2-3 times by Demoff.

 

[RamzFanz]

Kroenke has said he's in support of the Riverfront stadium? I know that Demoff has thrown in input, but as far as I know that's about it.

I never said Kroenke, I said the Rams. Demoff has clearly said they support the new stadium.

"Our job is to be engaged with the task force, to give that proposal the best chance of it being built for us.”

“There’s this perception that we have an adversarial relationship with the task force,” Demoff told the Post-Dispatch. “I think Dave and Bob would be the first to tell you that’s absolutely not true."

"We have worked with the task force. I really admire the work that they’ve gotten done to date."