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.

MrMotes

Starter
Joined
May 6, 2014
Messages
954
If the Rams really do leave and if the Raiders moved to St. Louis, i'm sure they'd do fine once the trauma and shock of what happened wore off some.

But i think the Raiders would be smart to stay in the Bay Area if they can make it work. The Niners are falling apart 50 miles south in San Jose. The Bay Area is a major market ripe for the taking and the Raiders are already well established up there...
 

Big Willie

Starter
Joined
Aug 24, 2014
Messages
763
Another denial by the league is expansion. It may not be on the table today but what about for a team to start in 2019 or 2020. I know this usually starts issues but Bernie had an article that quoted Nixon mentioning Cleveland and I am not referring to the team name but the conditional guarantees that the NFL gave the city in regards to getting a team. The NFL promised financial assistance and either an existing team or expansion team if they could make the stadium plan actionable.

"Nixon said something interesting last week when I asked him what would happen if the Rams are green-lighted for a move to LA — even if St. Louis has funding in place to build the new stadium on the north riverfront.

The governor cited Cleveland as an example of hope."

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/colu...cle_ea2bb1a4-9219-5ab1-9065-ed0611c4df97.html
I am only interested in a team with an owner who is 100 percent on board with making it work in St Louis. Expansion with a team in this market would meet my criteria.
 

Big Willie

Starter
Joined
Aug 24, 2014
Messages
763
The only way I approve this is if the Raiders name stays in Oakland, and we get a new LOCAL owner. If the Rams leave, the city has to push for this to get a team with their own history. No more split fan bases that fight over their cities.
Amen ChrisW!
 

OldSchool

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
40,566
I wouldn't advise people of any city to hold their breath waiting for an expansion team.
 

Big Willie

Starter
Joined
Aug 24, 2014
Messages
763
Yeah but for the rest of us located in St Louis it'd be nice to have a team.
I was sharing my thoughts. I most likely am in the minority on how I feel, but considering what the fans of St Louis and Los Angeles are going through, and the fact that both have gone through this before, I am fed up and choose not to see the greed of the NFL subject hundreds of thousands of fan to an emotional roller coaster like this again. By saying yes to another city's team we are perpetuating the nonsense and fostering more greed. Like Roberto Duran (for you older readers), I say "no mas".
 

bluecoconuts

Legend
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
13,073
Except that he was also part of the group trying to land an expansion team in the Lou before signing on to buy into the Rams on the condition they relocated to St Louis. The Rams were the second team he worked to bring to his home state.

Didn't Kroenke try to buy the Patriots before Kraft did? I think that getting a team in his home state was certainly a bonus, but I don't know if it was the main reason. Unless he would have tried to move the Pats to St Louis, then y'all would be Pats fans.
 

bubbaramfan

Legend
Camp Reporter
Joined
Aug 7, 2013
Messages
7,069
I want to ask Carmon Policy a couple of questions. I went to the Carson townhall meeting to ask them, but he snubbed me andm y neighbors. Maybe he knew what questions I wanted answered.

What Carmon Policy and Dean Spanos won't tell you is that the site has not been signed off by either the California Stat Board of Health or the EPA. The remediations set forth by both those agencies have not been completed. Once they are, both those agencies will issue certificates of completion to the City of Carson. Those certificates are to be made public. That hasn't happened yet.

My question to Carmon Policy: What has to be done, and when do you expect the EPA and the California State Board of Health to issue those certificates to the City of Carson?

I'm guessing Carmon has no answers.
 

beej

Rookie
Joined
Jun 17, 2014
Messages
464
I want to ask Carmon Policy a couple of questions. I went to the Carson townhall meeting to ask them, but he snubbed me andm y neighbors. Maybe he knew what questions I wanted answered.

What Carmon Policy and Dean Spanos won't tell you is that the site has not been signed off by either the California Stat Board of Health or the EPA. The remediations set forth by both those agencies have not been completed. Once they are, both those agencies will issue certificates of completion to the City of Carson. Those certificates are to be made public. That hasn't happened yet.

My question to Carmon Policy: What has to be done, and when do you expect the EPA and the California State Board of Health to issue those certificates to the City of Carson?

I'm guessing Carmon has no answers.
bubbaram, no offense, but I really don't get you. Man! if I lived in a place that was causing cancer as bad as you say, I'd been gone a long time ago. And If somebody was coming in to clean that mess up, even if I hated them as a football team, I'd think for health reasons alone you'd be pushing for it with all your might. why do you want it to remain as it is?
 

RamBill

Legend
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
8,874
St. Louis might still stand in the way of Rams in Inglewood
By Nick Wagoner, ESPN Staff Writer

http://espn.go.com/blog/st-louis-rams/post/_/id/20261/st-louis-might-still-stand-in-way-of-inglewood


SCHAUMBURG, Ill. -- In the many permutations of how the race to bring football back to Los Angeles could play out, one major factor in the middle of it all is what's happening in the home markets of St. Louis, Oakland and San Diego.

Depending on whom you talk to and when, you might get the feeling that Inglewood is ahead of Carson or vice-versa. Certainly, the ownership group assembled here Tuesday gives off the distinct impression that what Rams owner Stan Kroenke has put together in Inglewood is nothing short of impressive. Kroenke's nearly $2 billion project could redefine what an NFL venue aspires to be, offering a regular home for Super Bowls and other major events. It will undoubtedly be hard to turn down.

But as multiple owners put it Tuesday, while the Inglewood project looks to be the best and most desirable in Los Angeles, that has to be weighed against the work being done in St. Louis. If you believe Inglewood to be leading the Los Angeles race, there's also no doubt that St. Louis is leading the other home markets in competing to keep their teams.

League executive Eric Grubman openly discussed what's taking place in each market on Tuesday. In sticking with his words from this entire process, he again offered optimism and kind words for the job Dave Peacock and his group have done in St. Louis. On the opposite end of the spectrum is Oakland, which still hasn't offered much of substance to the league (though there's hope of an offer soon). San Diego comes in somewhere in between the two but still lagging behind St. Louis.

"With respect to St. Louis, they have made consistent progress over quite a number of months," Grubman said. "They are continuing to assemble the land and their financing strategies do have to be finalized. So risks remain. They’re dealing with those risks similarly to San Diego and for that matter any market that would be going through this. We asked about the risks and the litigation strategies and we keep asking about them until they’re eliminated. I don’t like to try to grade things midstream. It’s very hard to grade these other than to say there’s a lot of hard work going into it. I know they have a great deal of optimism."

That optimism from the St. Louis stadium task force is rooted in the belief that they'll be able to clear the hurdles necessary to put together an actionable financing plan and accumulate the land needed to make saying no to St. Louis an extremely difficult task for the NFL's owners. What hasn't created much optimism, at least among the St. Louis fanbase, has been Kroenke's lack of involvement.

Rams chief operating officer Kevin Demoff has been in regular communication with Peacock. According to Demoff, the pair spoke on Monday night with Demoff offering a rundown on what he and Kroenke were going to present on Inglewood on Tuesday. But Kroenke has remained silent, which is a big problem considering part of the St. Louis plan is dependent on Kroenke's willingness to invest $250 million plus payback a $200 million G4 loan in a St. Louis stadium in which he's so far shown no interest in.

Commissioner Roger Goodell was asked Tuesday what he'd say to fans in St. Louis frustrated by Kroenke's lack of communication.

"Well, I think I’m not going to speak for Stan," Goodell said. "That’s something Stan needs to do. But what I said to the governor is that we should focus on developing a potential solution, a solution that will work for the fans in St. Louis. We recognize we have great fans in that market. And if there is a potential solution, we want to know it. I know the membership wants to know it. That’s the focus we’ve kept."

To this point, Peacock & Co. have been in constant communication with the league and have presented their plan to the six-owner committee in charge of Los Angeles opportunities.

All along, Missouri Governor Jay Nixon has pointed to having the financing plan in place by the fall.

That's not a coincidence because October is the fall and that's when the next round of owners meetings are. It's at those meetings that Peacock and the St. Louis group are expected to get their first audience with all of the league's owners. It will no doubt be a pivotal point in the group's efforts to keep the Rams.

For his part, Goodell is sticking to the notion that the league will abide by the terms of their guidelines on relocation.

"We have policies that have been in place for decades," Goodell said. "They were modified in the '80s and they’re meant to address a responsibility to each of our home markets. What needs to be done if you seek to relocate your franchise. We are making sure that those are applied consistently and fairly. We are doing everything working with the communities making sure we understand exactly what they are proposing. We’re working with the teams to make sure we understand the circumstances."

The Rams argument for leaving centers on the idea of St. Louis breaking the terms of their lease by not updating the Edward Jones Dome. Whether that's enough to fall in line with the league's relocation policies remains to be seen. So, too, does the ability of the St. Louis stadium task force to get an actionable plan in place.

Until those questions (and many others) are answered, the future of football in St. Louis and of the Rams remains up in the air.
 

RamBill

Legend
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
8,874
Here's what JT:

What's the vibe you're getting around Rams Park with all uncertainty surrounding the franchise's future?

"I think some people are wondering if they're going to be asked to move. Say you're in some kind of marketing. You know the St. Louis market, but you don't know the LA market. So are they going to hire people out there? I think some people just don't want to move to LA. Some people are looking forward to any move to LA.

They've had a few people leave. I've been told...and no one has confirmed this for me...the equipment managers and trainers have been told, 'We want you guys to come with us.' But that isn't true for the whole building.

One of the vibes, talking to people in the hallways at the hotel in Chicago. The Rams are very confident they're going to pull this off. I've heard they're making plans for where their practice facility is going to be. I've heard Thousands Oaks rumored. They seem confident this is going to happen."

Is there any doubt Stan Kroenke wants to move the Rams to Los Angeles?

"I think the whole circumstances of what happened yesterday...when you have Carmen Policy coming out. He's a good salesman. He goes out and talks about...why Carson is the better site. But (the Chargers and Raiders) are not having their owners up there. Contrast that to the Rams (and Inglewood)...Stan Kroenke was the lead-off man for their presentation. If it's not obvious what's going on here...people aren't paying attention."

So how is Dave Peacock so confident if the Rams are confident they're going to get approved by the NFL?

"I think no one really knows right now (what's going to happen). The league isn't saying no to anybody right now. The NFL can only encourage the home markets to keep doing what they're doing. And they're not going to discourage the Inglewood and Carson projects, either."

What's the next step for Dave Peacock and the rest of the stadium task force?

"(At the owners meetings in October), I believe St. Louis will make its presentation to all the owners. The whole league hasn't really seen what St. Louis has to offer. We're so kind of consumed by this, we assume all the owners know what's going on. But they don't."

http://www.insidestl.com/insideSTLc...nfident-Theyll-Pull-Off-Los-Angeles-Move.aspx
 

RamBill

Legend
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
8,874
Sam Farmer of The LA Times Discusses NFL Teams Coming To Los Angeles with Rich Eisen. The Rams seem most determined to leave, while the owners on the LA Stadium commission want to take care of Chargers owner Alex Spanos. Farmer says it could still work out in so many ways. Robert Kraft said yesterday, STL deserves an NFL team….but he didn’t specify the Rams.

Listen to Farmer Talk LA Relocation
 

bubbaramfan

Legend
Camp Reporter
Joined
Aug 7, 2013
Messages
7,069
OK beej. I've posted here many times earlier in this same thread why the proposed Carson stadium is a sham. Yes I'd love to see a stadium built here, but I also know that's not going to happen. My home is worth about half of what it should be. I'd love to move out of here, but I can't because no one will buy my home. They've had all kinds of projects planned for that old landfill, but none ever happen because its too expensive and time consuming to do what needs to be done to get it shovel ready. Maybe Spanos and Davis are serious. Maybe they have a few extra hundred million to get it done. Maybe they both have the 500 mil for relocation. Maybe if they have that kind of scratch, I ask myself, they just build a stadium in their current city. Or maybe, just maybe, they are using Carson for leverage.
Policy told the owners what a great site it is, close to two freeways, center of LA county blah, blah. So why has the property been empty for 40 years? Why did the NFL pas it by when they spent million in '98-99 evaluating it when they were looking at LA for expansion?
I'll give you a clue beej. Its a dump full of toxic waste that for 50 years no one wants to deal with. Maybe this time they are serious. I'd be jubilant if they were. but I won't believe it til I see the equipment start moving dirt. And I damn sure not getting my hopes up, (again).
 

ChrisW

Stating the obvious
Joined
Sep 9, 2013
Messages
4,670
Maybe if they have that kind of scratch, I ask myself, they just build a stadium in their current city.

The same could be said for Stan. LA is the second largest market. That's why.

Edit: Spanos also claims that 1/4 of his fan base is in LA. I'm not sure what the whole deal is with Davis, but it seems he's just along for the ride.
 
Last edited:

Goose

GoosesGanders
Joined
Feb 11, 2015
Messages
363
Name
Goose
bubbaram, no offense, but I really don't get you. Man! if I lived in a place that was causing cancer as bad as you say, I'd been gone a long time ago. And If somebody was coming in to clean that mess up, even if I hated them as a football team, I'd think for health reasons alone you'd be pushing for it with all your might. why do you want it to remain as it is?

Beej,
I am going to step in here because Bubba isn't not saying that at all. In fact he would love nothing more than to have the site re-mediated and have a brand spanking new stadium put there. What Bubba has said is that despite reports in the media, locally, he is not seeing the actions that support the reports. From his point of view things are much complicated than are being conveyed and he does not see how that site could support a stadium long term even if it cleaned up. Although Bubba is a Rams fan his opinion on the Carson site is not based on what team(s) could potentially play there.
 

RamBill

Legend
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
8,874
Stan Kroenke headed toward cross-ownership resolution
By Nick Wagoner

http://espn.go.com/blog/st-louis-ra...enke-headed-toward-cross-ownership-resolution

SCHAUMBURG, Ill. -- In gaining approval to become owner of the St. Louis Rams in 2010, Stan Kroenke agreed to transfer ownership of his Denver-based major league sports franchises (the Nuggets and Avalanche) to his son Josh so as to comply with league rules on cross-ownership.

It's a process that was expected to take about four years because of the complications that go with estate planning on a transfer of something so valuable. By the end of last year, Kroenke still hadn't satisfied the requirements but received another extension to get it taken care of.

According to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, Kroenke should have everything settled soon enough.

"The finance committee has been considering this over some period of time," Goodell said. "They gave Stan until June 15 of this year to submit a plan. He has done so. There was a brief report from Bob McNair, the chairman of the finance committee today. We believe that the plan that he submitted will be in compliance with ownership policies. It’ll be taken to the finance committee probably in September."

The details of Kroenke's plan are unknown at this time but it's clear that whatever he has proposed will likely be approved and won't stand in the way of his efforts to build a palatial new stadium in Inglewood and move the Rams there to play in it.
 

RamFan503

Grill and Brew Master
Moderator
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
34,830
Name
Stu
Didn't Kroenke try to buy the Patriots before Kraft did? I think that getting a team in his home state was certainly a bonus, but I don't know if it was the main reason. Unless he would have tried to move the Pats to St Louis, then y'all would be Pats fans.
Yes he did. He was actually bidding against Kraft. Funny that NE also was having stadium issues at the time. Hard to say what he would have done if successful. It may have indeed been the St Louis Patriots. :eek:
 

V3

Hall of Fame
Joined
Apr 23, 2013
Messages
3,848
If the Rams really do leave and if the Raiders moved to St. Louis, i'm sure they'd do fine once the trauma and shock of what happened wore off some.

But i think the Raiders would be smart to stay in the Bay Area if they can make it work. The Niners are falling apart 50 miles south in San Jose. The Bay Area is a major market ripe for the taking and the Raiders are already well established up there...
I have no idea what other St. Louisans are thinking but I wouldn't support the Raiders. I really can't stand that franchise.
 

bluecoconuts

Legend
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
13,073
In terms of the Raiders I think a big part of the issue is their brand name is a bit tainted. Maybe moving to St Louis would solve that, but it would probably need more of a total rebranding. New owner, new city, new colors, new team. I don't think that's a very likely outcome though. If it did end up with the Raiders moving to St Louis, I just hope you guys don't adopt that fan culture.
 

RamFan503

Grill and Brew Master
Moderator
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
34,830
Name
Stu
Mootless?
Yeah - not one to be the grammar police but that was pretty funny. Sorry Iced. Not only is that not a word but it is a pretty funny sounding non-word.

These three "concerned citizens" and Ammann are a bunch of idiots... This shouldn't go anywhere, in fact I believe that the court of appeals already ruled that there cant be any appeals on this subject.
I don't think it has reached the court of appeals as of yet. If they buy that the professor and his "clients" have standing, then it could go somewhere. If not, I think they will essentially be telling Ammann to go away and quit wasting their time. If they do that, I'm thinking it will be a pretty short line for students signing up to take his law classes.

They ruled on municipal laws not interfering with state statutes but nothing in that decision says that the city must fund a stadium. The RSA can build a stadium but neither the city or county has the obligation to pay for it.
The court of appeals did this?

Not a legal expert at all but from what I read the first thing Amman has to prove for it to go anywhere is that the judge was wrong to exclude he and his clients from the first proceedings. Then IIRC he had 2 other points he was appealing with the judge.
This is my take as well. Not an attorney either, but I have stayed at a Holliday Inn.

I don't want the Rams to move :cry:
^^^ This
I also wanted to bring this up re: the appeal of the court decision.

What grounds does Amman have for appeal? Don't you have to be a party to the case to take the case to the appeal level? He was not granted the right to intervene, so I don't think he's listed as a party on the case.

disclaimer: I am by no way versed in law. This is just how I'm thinking as a lay person.
I think ruling on if the judge was wrong in denying them standing will likely be the first thing the court of appeals rules on. If they agree with Frawly, I believe the rest is mootless. :D Sorry... couldn't help myself.
 

RamBill

Legend
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
8,874
Peacock: Region controls NFL destiny in St. Louis
• By David Hunn

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_71708725-37ca-5ace-897e-708a2a8b3a98.html

ST. LOUIS • A leader of the local effort to build a new riverfront stadium insisted on Wednesday that the region is in charge of its own destiny and can keep a National Football League team in St. Louis regardless of Rams owner Stan Kroenke's efforts to move to Los Angeles.

"The only thing that can get in our way is ourselves, as a region," said Dave Peacock, co-leader of Gov. Jay Nixon's stadium task force. "If we can come together, we can get this done."

Peacock spoke in response to this week's NFL meeting, during which Kroenke captivated team owners with his plan to build a new home for the Rams in Inglewood, Calif.

Owners also heard from a competing effort, by the San Diego Chargers and Oakland Raiders, to build a stadium in Carson, Calif., just a few miles south of Inglewood. The NFL hasn't had a team in Los Angeles since the Raiders and Rams left two decades ago. The league is not considering three teams in L.A.

Kroenke's presentation, however, seemed a step ahead of Carson's, said several league owners, observers and executives. Kroenke had detailed stadium drawings, and wowed owners with a polished presentation. One owner called it "exciting" and "sexy."

But Peacock told the Post-Dispatch on Wednesday morning that NFL owners and executives have repeatedly reiterated that St. Louis is still largely in control of its own future — a point they reinforced in Chicago this week.

He said the task force was making consistent progress on plans for a $998 million open-air riverfront stadium.

Land acquisition is ongoing. There are no holdouts who aren't in ongoing discussions with the task force, Peacock said. The team has submitted tax credit applications to the state, and will soon send another, requesting money to help clean up site pollution, perhaps this week.

Both Peacock and Mayor Francis Slay have said they hope to have a financing package to the city's Board of Aldermen when the legislators return from summer break in about a month. They both also committed to giving the board a vote on the package.

The architecture firm HOK continues to develop site plans, Peacock said.

And he does not anticipate trouble securing funding from the state. The state currently pays $12 million a year to debt and upkeep at the Edward Jones Dome, where the Rams now play. Nixon has committed to continuing those payments in support of the new stadium. Several lawmakers have sued Nixon in Cole County, alleging Nixon does not have that authority without a Legislative vote.

Peacock said the task force is waiting for that ruling, but doesn't now believe Nixon needs Legislative action to fund the new stadium.

"These can all be done now," he said. "Nothing is really hindering us on financing from the state."

Moreover, Peacock said, he has been meeting with NFL owners, coast to coast, to ensure they understand St. Louis's stadium plan.

With that news, however, came a warning. "Unnecessary lawsuits" could slow progress, he said. He begged the Legislature to better understand stadium economics. And corporations, he said, must put their money behind their words.

Given all that, Peacock said, "we should have football here long-term."

"Those are things over which we, as a region, have influence and control," he said.

Peacock said he was recently talking with former Rams star Aeneas Williams, now a pastor who has worked recently to ease unrest in Ferguson. Williams said to him, "There are so many things that divide our community," Peacock remembered. "I don't know why we'd let an asset go that we cheer for together."

Owners and executives said this week they expect a final vote on team relocation in January.

Peacock said the St. Louis project will be ready to turn dirt shortly thereafter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.