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.

RamFan503

Grill and Brew Master
Moderator
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
34,833
Name
Stu

RAMbler

UDFA
Joined
Aug 22, 2014
Messages
75
Kroenke was the main person pitching Inglewood, said to have surprised people with how passionate he was, so I guess that settles that debate.

This is actually pretty huge as it also appears to put to rest the whole... "LA is just leverage" thing. It would appear Stan has wanted LA all along.
 

iced

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
6,620
So Fabiani is expecting 70 - 80% public financing? And then the NFL's $200 million on top of that? So Spanos wants a stadium built for him and he'll shell out about $100 million?

Sorry - but Fabiani is an idiot. There is no wonder how the Chargers have tainted the waters.

I don't agree with the writer's take on percentages - I think the NFL is looking stuff closer to 50/50,maybe even 40/60..but definitely not falling for a 30/70 - that was my point,those numbers have not changed,nor the things that would have to be put to a vote.

$750 million from the NFL and only $300 from the city? the NFL probably laughed at that
 

bluecoconuts

Legend
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
13,073
I don't agree with the writer's take on percentages - I think the NFL is looking stuff closer to 50/50,maybe even 40/60..but definitely not falling for a 30/70 - that was my point,those numbers have not changed,nor the things that would have to be put to a vote.

$750 million from the NFL and only $300 from the city? the NFL probably laughed at that

Isn't that roughly what St Louis is offering? If you move PSL over to the owner contribution, which the NFL apparently does.
 

MrMotes

Starter
Joined
May 6, 2014
Messages
954
So Fabiani is expecting 70 - 80% public financing? And then the NFL's $200 million on top of that? So Spanos wants a stadium built for him and he'll shell out about $100 million?

Sorry - but Fabiani is an idiot. There is no wonder how the Chargers have tainted the waters.

This is something that really makes me wonder.

Between Fabiani and Policy (today at the owner's meeting) the Chargers are beyond disrespectful to the city and fans of San Diego. It's gotten to the point of malice. How does the NFL let this happen in their name?

One of the only answers i can come up with is: It's a bluff and they all know it.

But i guess we'll know one way or another soon enough...
 

WillasDad

Rookie
Joined
Feb 24, 2014
Messages
147
Name
WillasDad
I don't think the courts have to decide anything. Whatever words are used, the Rams are no longer in the long term lease. They're legally free to relocate.

It's just my way of saying a court's opinion is all that really matters and we'll not likely see this matter in court so that's it.
 

rams2050

Starter
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
588
20 years old and there are 4 other stadiums have been replaced in the same amount of time just in the NFL

Yeah, but those four stadiums were NOT less than 20 years old. St. Louis is actually trying to build another brand new stadium -- a total of two -- in what will be less than 23 years. NO OTHER CITY HAS PROPOSED OR DONE THIS FOR A FOOTBALL TEAM, to my knowledge, in history.

As for StanK having the actual gall to speak to to the other owners about WHAT WENT WRONG IN ST.LOUIS, well, excuse me! He has been the actual 100% owner for a mere 5 years. St. Louis was extremely supportive of the Rams -- and remains so today -- even though the team has become bottom dwellers. During the GSOT years the Rams were ranked in the top 2 or 3 teams when it came to the sale of merchandise. The GSOT Super Bowl team was feted with a parade where an estimated 1 to 2 million people were in attendance.

What went WRONG may have been StanK! (Although, I will admit that he got Jeff Fisher and he has spent to the limit of the cap each year). But as far as being an engaged and thoughtful owner, one who seemingly cared about the fans WHO MADE HIM MONEY, he was less than a zero.
 

The Ripper

Starter
Joined
Apr 25, 2015
Messages
794
Name
Rip
I don't agree with the writer's take on percentages - I think the NFL is looking stuff closer to 50/50,maybe even 40/60..but definitely not falling for a 30/70 - that was my point,those numbers have not changed,nor the things that would have to be put to a vote.

$750 million from the NFL and only $300 from the city? the NFL probably laughed at that
Isn't that roughly what St Louis is offering? If you move PSL over to the owner contribution, which the NFL apparently does.

Yes, it's the same but if the 200 million plus land is part of the final deal it would get it in the ballpark along with all the revenues from the stadium.
 

The Ripper

Starter
Joined
Apr 25, 2015
Messages
794
Name
Rip
Yeah, but those four stadiums were NOT less than 20 years old. St. Louis is actually trying to build another brand new stadium -- a total of two -- in what will be less than 23 years. NO OTHER CITY HAS PROPOSED OR DONE THIS FOR A FOOTBALL TEAM, to my knowledge, in history.

As for StanK having the actual gall to speak to to the other owners about WHAT WENT WRONG IN ST.LOUIS, well, excuse me! He has been the actual 100% owner for a mere 5 years. St. Louis was extremely supportive of the Rams -- and remains so today -- even though the team has become bottom dwellers. During the GSOT years the Rams were ranked in the top 2 or 3 teams when it came to the sale of merchandise. The GSOT Super Bowl team was feted with a parade where an estimated 1 to 2 million people were in attendance.

What went WRONG may have been StanK! (Although, I will admit that he got Jeff Fisher and he has spent to the limit of the cap each year). But as far as being an engaged and thoughtful owner, one who seemingly cared about the fans WHO MADE HIM MONEY, he was less than a zero.

Yes, 4 other cities did the same thing, Indy, Seattle, Atalanta and Tampa. Tampa was 22 years from the opening of the first to to completion of the new. In Atlanta the stadium was only 18 years old when they proposed the new stadium. The Kingdome was 20 years old when the stadium was proposed and it was demolished at 24. Indy was 20 years.
 
Last edited:

RamFan503

Grill and Brew Master
Moderator
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
34,833
Name
Stu
I don't agree with the writer's take on percentages - I think the NFL is looking stuff closer to 50/50,maybe even 40/60..but definitely not falling for a 30/70 - that was my point,those numbers have not changed,nor the things that would have to be put to a vote.

$750 million from the NFL and only $300 from the city? the NFL probably laughed at that
Was it the writers take on percentages or Fabiani's? I've heard similar things come out of his pie hole and it fits with what I've heard before about the situation.

Either way, I don't think we are getting the straight scoop from anyone right now. Makes it tough for the fans to really get a grasp on all of it.
 

bluecoconuts

Legend
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
13,073

Anything about the Avs? *Edit* Duh, that's what the "lanche" part was.

I figured that was going to happen, so if there is going to be something to entice Kroenke to stay, doesn't seem like that'll be it. Now the question is what could they do if it were to come to it? We've heard quite a few times the owners will make sure that everyone comes out happy, so how do you make him happy?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.