New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[Legatron4]

Im glad Stan feels the need to fuck over STL fans cause he wasn't vocal about a breach of contract. It's your team Stan, don't blame other people. You should have taken care of it.

 

[Loyal]

Kroenke was the main person pitching Inglewood, said to have surprised people with how passionate he was, so I guess that settles that debate.

No..no...We have never actually "heard" him say that he wants to move the Rams..Until we hear it, it aint so!

 

[WillasDad]

The Rams can SAY the sky is hot pink and the clouds are made from m&ms but it doesn't mean that it is legally true.

I guess it's for the courts to decide, but it can't feel good knowing the Rams believe this to be the case.

 

[The Ripper]

The other notion we can put to rest is the stiffening of the relocation policy. Goodell said " the foundation is our relocation policies, policies that have been in place for decades and they were modified in the 80's"

 

[Rmfnlt]

Long term revenues for the team is very important for the league. The NFL wants to make sure the teams remain viable so they want certainties in regards to both long and short term revenues. That has nothing to do with the relocation guidelines which aren't part of the bylaws they're just league policy.

“Your supposition is that it’s just public money that turns the key in the lock that opens the door that makes the market viable,” Grubman said. “That’s not all there is. Let’s put the pieces together. You have to have a stadium and a financing plan wherever that money comes from, public, private or a combination of the two. You have to have a market assessment that suggests that the market can and will be healthy for the long term so that stadium plan is supported.

“And if you do that then you’ve demonstrated viability against relocation guidelines, but it still goes to a vote. But the reason I make that distinction is that I could see a scenario where a financing plan is assembled and land is assembled and an entitlement is assembled but the market assessment is dim. And in that scenario, I don’t know that the owners would necessarily feel compelled to keep the team there.



Private financing doesn't hurt the NFL either. The 2nd part if your talking about the 2 LA proposals that's the case but in the home markets it's definitely going to be a big factor in the final decision.

I don't think you're getting what I'm saying... but I'm too tired to go further on this with you.

I remain believing that private vs. public funding is of little importance to the NFL when making the decison of whether a team stays or goes.

 

[tonyl711]

I also hope they asked Spanos why he's willing to spend money in Carson yet not in San Diego. He has San Diego wanting to work with him but he seems to be too good to work with his home market. He also is making the home market an after thought.

after 15 years i would think he has reason to play hard ball with them.

 

[The Ripper]

I don't think you're getting what I'm saying... but I'm too tired to go further on this with you.

I remain believing that private vs. public funding is of little importance to the NFL when making the decison of whether a team stays or goes.

The split is important.

 

[OldSchool]

after 15 years i would think he has reason to play hard ball with them.

Other way around, after 15 years of him ignoring the city, San Diego has a right to play hard ball with him. But they keep wanting to bring him to the table. He's just unwilling to work with them.

 

[The Ripper]

after 15 years i would think he has reason to play hard ball with them.

The Chargers have been doing that for years but there's 2 big changes, Inglewood and funding for a stadium in LA. The other problem for the Charges has been the amount of money to buy their way out of a lease. The Chargers don't have deep pockets to do anything on their own.

 

[OldSchool]

as has alot of the points you try to make

I thought we were staying away from personal attacks. My point with that comment was the page before he had asked that question. Another member answered it and his answer was ignored. That same answer has been shown to be true several times yet the other posters answer still got ignored.

 

[Rmfnlt]

I guess it's all been put to rest except when they move to L.A. Wasn't that simple?

 

[Rmfnlt]

The split is important.

If you say so.

 

[bluecoconuts]

yep - hopefully we can stop acting like he's ever been sincere in dealing with St.Louis by sending Demoff to talk to Peacock.

I think most of us have figured out that he nor Spanos have been really sincere in negotiating with their cities. If they were then there would probably be deals.

The ramifications only apply when there's a breach. Like I have said before it was called a breach for the 2005 first tier review and arbitration was brought in to decide that through arbitration and not the courts.

I think the problem is that people are seeing the word breach as meaning different things. Personally I saw breach as they didn't live up to their end of the bargain, and it appears as if the Rams see it the same way. Others saw breach as they essentially broke the law which held worse ramifications. I'm not sure if that was just focusing on a word and not the intent or if it was more about making the CVC appear better.

 

[tonyl711]

So has St Louis.

yra because we were really thinking a 15 year old stadium needed to be replaced, get real

 

[The Ripper]

If you say so.

It is. The average over 20 years is close to 60% and 10 years 50%. It's out there and even some of Chargers reporters have stated that.

 

[Loyal]

FRank Cusimono from CBS Radio in LA, asked a direct question about the impressive progress Peacock & Co. have made with the Riverfront PLan and how the NFL could consider letting the Rams leave St Louis (This isn't exactly how he phrased it, but its close)....It was interesting how Goodell referred to the St Louis market (as well as the others) as a general qualification of meeting NFL Guidelines...Also inre to San Diego question, but it applies to St Louis as well, whether a plan is appealing to a teams owner......Has Stan ever mentioned the Riverfornt deal publically?

 

[tonyl711]

St Louis followed the lease policy to the T and when the rams came back with an unrealistic demand they still turned around and put a new stadium offer out there in less than a year.

dont confuse them with facts, dont you know St Louis should have had a new stadium being built long before arbitration? lol

 

[The Ripper]

yra because we were really thinking a 15 year old stadium needed to be replaced, get real

20 years old and there are 4 other stadiums have been replaced in the same amount of time just in the NFL

 

[bluecoconuts]

dont confuse them with facts, dont you know St Louis should have had a new stadium being built long before arbitration? lol

That has nothing to do with anything, and it's premised on faulty logic. If St Louis followed the lease policy "to the T" then we wouldn't be in this mess because the Rams would be playing in a top tier stadium right now.

 

[iced]

I think most of us have figured out that he nor Spanos have been really sincere in negotiating with their cities. If they were then there would probably be deals.

Except the San Diego deal is pretty bad, and has not been well received by spanos nor the NFL itself.... It was said when the proposal was made public, and nothing has changed.