New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[Big Willie]

Don't know if you are in the minority but I am pretty much there with you. I don't really care what city the Rams play in other than I would like it to be a really good FOOTBALL facility and I am frankly sick of the whole moving for greener pastures. I didn't like it when the Rams left LA and I don't like the idea now. The fans deserve better. Just want this whole debacle over and done with. And though I hate to say it, even if it is just deciding to let the Rams move, I think I'd take that over this thing drawing out for another 4 or 5 months.

I agree. Decide already, so that we can try and enjoy this season, playoffs and look forward to the draft.

 

[WillasDad]

2) As regards Section C, subheading 4...The Rams received a TON of public money when they came to St. Louis (an essentially "free" stadium, tax abatements, a sweetheart lease and the poison pill "top tier" clause that allowed them to even be in this position). There is ZERO way to say that the lease was "breached". The terms of the LEASE were to maintain a top tier stadium or got o arbitration to judge what would be top tier, THEN if the CVC did not make the updates, the remaining years of the lease would be void and the Rams commitment would be annual and the CVC commitment to the facility for the Rams would likewise be annual. That is execution of the clauses in the contract, NOT "BREACH". Does it legally give the Rams the right to seek a new home, without the CVC....damn right it gives them the right to LOOK. The right to move though is no where in the existing lease, that right is granted by the NFL. I get massively sick of reading people state the city of St. Louis "breached" the contract. The parties have followed the provisions of the lease to a tee, so stop calling it a "breach" already....arrrrrrrrggggggggggghhhhhhh! (Sorry, had to vent my inner Charlie Brown there...)

Posting what appears to be commentary on NFL relocation standards to argue nonbreach isn't nearly as helpful as posting the lease contract itself.

 

[RamzFanz]

dumping on a marquee player in the league in Brady and upholding the suspension for a flimsy offense

I do not see him being so hard on Brady and the air pressure

While you make a lot of good points, Brady wasn't punished for the deflated balls, he was punished for destroying his phone on the day he was going to meet with them and otherwise not cooperating with the investigation.

 

[The Ripper]

http://www.leg.state.mn.us/webcontent/lrl/issues/FootballStadium/NFLFranchiseRelocationRules.pdf

Everything that is quoted below was taken from the link, which actually is a much longer document regarding NFL franchise relocations.
This quoted section follows from this statement in Section A. :

The notice must be accompanied by a “statement of reasons” in support of the proposed transfer. The statement must address each of the factors outlined in Part C below, and may also identify and discuss any other relevant business factors that the club believes support its request to move. The Statement must also include all of the material noted in Appendix One.



My take as regards these guidelines:

1) I know that most people firmly believe the NFL will cast these guidelines aside and do whatever THEY want...to which I agree to an extent. The LEAGUE may decide to put aside some of these provisions, or turn a blind eye to them...but they will NOT do it because big bad Enos and his wallet say to do so. IF the NFL decides to pee pee on the fans of St. Louis and use any of these guidelines as a cudgel to beat them up with, then we will all know that the league is full of crap, maybe more so than I am willing to go with yet. I hear Goddell talking about "responsibilities of the clubs in their current markets" and I can't help but believe he is laying the groundwork for why the league MAY say 'no' to the Rams moving.

Look at this through the prism of Roger Goddell for a minute. He has pushed on with this Deflategate thing waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay past the point most sane people believed he would - pissing off Kraft, dumping on a marquee player in the league in Brady and upholding the suspension for a flimsy offense in the name of "the integrity of the game" and because an archaic rule about air pressure may or may not have been manipulated or violated due to storage of the balls or intentional deflations. He is showing an almost "Les Miserables" devotion to upholding the law....a modern day Jean Valjean hunting Javert. Since he still has a recommendation and some influence on the ultimate outcome, I do not see him being so hard on Brady and the air pressure and then turning a blind eye to the upholding of the leagues relocation guidelines. He is not going to support a fast and easy reading or interpretation of the rules.

2) As regards Section C, subheading 4...The Rams received a TON of public money when they came to St. Louis (an essentially "free" stadium, tax abatements, a sweetheart lease and the poison pill "top tier" clause that allowed them to even be in this position). There is ZERO way to say that the lease was "breached". The terms of the LEASE were to maintain a top tier stadium or got o arbitration to judge what would be top tier, THEN if the CVC did not make the updates, the remaining years of the lease would be void and the Rams commitment would be annual and the CVC commitment to the facility for the Rams would likewise be annual. That is execution of the clauses in the contract, NOT "BREACH". Does it legally give the Rams the right to seek a new home, without the CVC....damn right it gives them the right to LOOK. The right to move though is no where in the existing lease, that right is granted by the NFL. I get massively sick of reading people state the city of St. Louis "breached" the contract. The parties have followed the provisions of the lease to a tee, so stop calling it a "breach" already....arrrrrrrrggggggggggghhhhhhh! (Sorry, had to vent my inner Charlie Brown there...)

3) As regards Section C, subheading 5...has anyone seen or heard of the Rams claiming to be losing money IN ST. LOUIS? (The opportunity to self-enrich is NOT part of these guidelines...in fact, they state: "Article 4.3 also reflects the League’s collective judgment that unassigned franchise opportunities (including “second franchise” opportunities in the home territory of a member club) are owned by the League’s members as a collective whole and, by definition, that no club has rights to more than a single “home territory.”) This is laughable to believe that a "business genius" like Enos Stanley has the sweetest lease agreement in the league (still) AND gets $226M a year in shared revenue AND has a salary cap that protects him from higher revenue teams....but he still LOSES money in St. Louis? That is either a) a lie or b) a damned lie or c) statistics. The Rams are NOT losing money.

4) As regards Section C, subheading 6....good faith? "Give me everything in my now voided lease or I am leaving" is not a negotiation. The fact that Silent Enos refuses to publicly address the St. Louis market AT ALL is simply not "good faith". The opportunity to make things right is NOT limited to the initial lease agreement. Do not think for one minute that Carmen Policy and the Carson group won't be hammering away at this point. They have collectively been trying to get new stadiums for 35 years. The Raiders franchise was supposed to have a football only stadium 20 years ago, the Chargers have been trying for 15 years to replace Qualcomm. The Rams are on year one of a year-by-year lease agreement. 35 years or 1 year.

5) As regards Section C, subheading 7....contributed to the state of the franchise? Well, Enos Stanley and lapdog can TRY to claim that they had nothing to do with the worst 5-year stretch in league history, but Enos was a minority owner and he was clearly not disturbed enough to sell, so that makes him at minimum partially culpable for the disaster that was much of the last decade. And even if he wants top claim that was not all his fault, the fact is since he bought the team they still have a losing record, they still have not sniffed the playoffs and they still are his responsibility. His product is supposed to be entertainment. The on-field freak show of futility that was 15-65 was horrific. Add to the on-field ugliness the off-field antics and tactics that clearly antagonize his current home market and poison the good will of the community and that he STILL has an offer to fund a huge chunk of a new local building and there is no way to reasonably conclude that he meets even part of this guideline!

Now, if someone really wants to believe that none of this matters, that the only thing that matters in this final decision is the bank account and net worth of Enos Stanley Kroenke and his coldhearted machinations to rip the Rams out of the very soil HE was instrumental in transplanting them 20 years ago, then so be it. You worship the dollar and probably fit in real well in today's society. I will hold out hope that the real decision makers have foresight, integrity, and a sense of history that informs them of how seemingly impregnable empires fall (they rot from within first). The NFL has guidelines. I have listed the most easily available information on the rule for relocation. There is always this nugget too:



For those who see the Rams as the only solution to the LA situation, I would imagine they are heartened by that last bit. If nothing else, the NFL had best wake up. They are riding high and feeling mighty on TV ratings, gambling revenue (which is the REAL driver of the NFL's popularity...it is simply a fun sport to gamble on and one that people really believe is "predictable" and gives them a chance to win) and fantasy football addicts (this is really an off-shoot of the gamblers these days); however, these kind of fan-torturing greed fests that are currently grinding up 3 fan bases in Oakland, San Diego and St. Louis are exactly the kind of "rot from within" that topples even the mightiest organizations.

The NFL doesn't cast aside the guidelines but they're subjective. The owners vote and that's the determining factor. They can pick and chose what is important based on the situation. The main problem is that this is not from the NFL but the State of Minnesota. None of the relocation policies are in the NFL Constitution and Bylaws. The relocation policies are also pretty much the same as it was for all the relocations since 1984.

The Rams do in fact have the right to relocate which is in the lease and it was triggered when the lease was breached on March 1 , 2015. Also the sweetest lease in the NFL ended when the guarantees went away.

The NFL is not going to evaluate St Louis on the last 2 1/2 years but the entire time the teams was in St Louis and they will use market data for the Cardinals like they did in 1995

 

[OldSchool]

Many of the current LA Rams fans were casual fans until 99. It's the truth. Some diehards exist still, many of them post here, but let's not be revisionist historians and act like all of the LA fans were diehards who lost their team. Hell, half of the people discussing this on facebook are too young to have been LA Rams fans, but that doesn't stop them from acting like this team rightfully belongs to them.
Most of those real fans moved on along time ago .. after all, it has been 20 years.

I've made it clear many times I don't care where the Rams play I am a Rams fan. I want them to stay in the NFC West with their current rivals but other than that they can play on Mars for all I care. I have not and will not celebrate the pain of anybody in St Louis over possibly losing our team. I have not and will not question their love for our team. I was really with you until I came to the part I quoted and put in bold.

How dare you question people not in St Louis' love for the Rams. Casual Rams fans until '99??? Who are you to play revisionist history and claim LA fans weren't diehard RAms fans. You sit there and give us your story on you and your family loving the Rams and tell us the lengths that you go to in supporting them. Then you turn around after asking everybody to empathize with you and other St Louis area fans and question other peoples devotion to the Rams.

As for the people you say are too young to be LA Rams fans has it ever dawned on you that those very people are just like your daughter whom you raised to love your favorite team? Is it so far out of the realm of possibility that there is a 16 year old just like young miss badnews that was raised by her daddy to love his favorite team also?

This is coming from somebody who never has and never will live in Los Angeles or St Louis. This is coming from somebody who travels to St Louis yearly to support the Rams, somebody that drives to San Francisco and has been to all but 1 game in San Francisco for the last 25 years. This is from somebody who travels to Seattle, Arizona and Denver to cheer on our Rams. I just can't support or agree with anybody who attacks or trivializes one side of this fan base. I will feel for the St Louis portion of the fan base if they do in fact lose the team, lets not pretend like any of us knows yet how this will end up, and I will never condone questioning somebody else love for the Rams. If a person from LA made these kind of negative generalizations of people in St Louis I would be just as hard on them. Sorry badnews but you are way out of line with that statement.

 

[rams2050]

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:

Uh, no, this is NOT true. The guy who was bidding against Kraft for the obnoxious Patriots (although they weren't obnoxious at the time, just a sorry sack of losers), was St. Louisan James Orthwein.

As for what the Rosenblooms want, it goes without saying -- and they aren't saying it on the record but JT has alluded to it -- that they want the Rams to stay in St. Louis. Indeed, when they sold that is what they were happiest about -- selling to a Missourian who would keep the Rams in st. Louis. Funny now, looking back. . . or not so funny, as the case may be.

 

[The Ripper]

Uh, no, this is NOT true. The guy who was bidding against Kraft for the obnoxious Patriots (although they weren't obnoxious at the time, just a sorry sack of losers), was St. Louisan James Orthwein.

As for what the Rosenblooms want, it goes without saying -- and they aren't saying it on the record but JT has alluded to it -- that they want the Rams to stay in St. Louis. Indeed, when they sold that is what they were happiest about -- selling to a Missourian who would keep the Rams in st. Louis. Funny now, looking back. . . or not so funny, as the case may be.

Orthwein wasn't bidding against Kraft. Orthwein owned the team and sold it to Kraft because of the lease in Foxboro.

 

[RhodyRams]

I have been a Rams fan for close to 40 years now. I have never lived in LA or in STL but have always been a fan of the horns since I started following football. I may be in the minority here, but, to me, it doesnt matter where the team plays, as long as they keep the horns on the helmets.

But I will be damned if I am not rooting for the city of STL in this whole mess. I will still support the Rams wherever they end up, but if STL gets another team, you get bet your bottom dollar that team will be my new second favorite

 

[badnews]

I like your entire post but this part again is a straw man. I haven't seen anyone here acting like the fans in the Lou deserve this or are lying in wait to rub it in anyone's faces if they move. It will suck big time if the Rams move. I get that and I am with you on that. I think most of the old timers or LA fans that are HERE would agree and that it is not really about the St Louis fan base.

Sure many Rams fans from the LA area would love to have the Rams back. It makes sense and I don't know how anyone can really blame them no matter where the Rams have played for 20 years. I don't think it is really appropriate to act like they shouldn't be here participating in this discussion. We are all Rams fans and this site was never about being forum exclusively for Rams fans from St Louis.

I fully expect St Louis fans to dislike fans wanting the Rams to move back to LA. How could they not? But the LA fans are going to be here and those fans also need to respect the fact that this is a forum for all Rams fans and the team resides in St Louis. We try to jump on any member that attacks either fan base. But I'm not really interested in telling people not to say they want them to come back to LA.

I haven't seen anything like that HERE.
Elsewhere though, it's not so nice.
And it seems that even here its getting closer to that. But I hope not.

 

[Sum1]

What does rewarded properly mean? I'm pretty sure the NFL didn't promise him that they'd force the Rams to stay, if that's what you're trying to say.

I'm pretty sure I didn't say that. But as has been reported continuously, the NFL continues to encourage Peacock and St. Louis to proceed. It's pretty apparent that means they are giving the impression that if St. Louis succeeds with their stadium plan they won't be left out to dry. What that means? Who knows...will the NFL follow through with what they are giving the impression they will do? Nobody really knows that either.

 

[RhodyRams]

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:

and Kraft actually had a handshake deal with the Governor of CT to build a new stadium in West Hartford and move the Pats out of Foxboro

Rams ended up in STL and then Kraft re-negged on the deal and kept the team in Massachusetts. To this day, I swear if Kraft didnt use CT as leverage to get a new stadium, the Rams had a 2.375% chance of being in my home state LOL

 

[badnews]

I've made it clear many times I don't care where the Rams play I am a Rams fan. I want them to stay in the NFC West with their current rivals but other than that they can play on Mars for all I care. I have not and will not celebrate the pain of anybody in St Louis over possibly losing our team. I have not and will not question their love for our team. I was really with you until I came to the part I quoted and put in bold.

How dare you question people not in St Louis' love for the Rams. Casual Rams fans until '99??? Who are you to play revisionist history and claim LA fans weren't diehard RAms fans. You sit there and give us your story on you and your family loving the Rams and tell us the lengths that you go to in supporting them. Then you turn around after asking everybody to empathize with you and other St Louis area fans and question other peoples devotion to the Rams.

As for the people you say are too young to be LA Rams fans has it ever dawned on you that those very people are just like your daughter whom you raised to love your favorite team? Is it so far out of the realm of possibility that there is a 16 year old just like young miss badnews that was raised by her daddy to love his favorite team also?

This is coming from somebody who never has and never will live in Los Angeles or St Louis. This is coming from somebody who travels to St Louis yearly to support the Rams, somebody that drives to San Francisco and has been to all but 1 game in San Francisco for the last 25 years. This is from somebody who travels to Seattle, Arizona and Denver to cheer on our Rams. I just can't support or agree with anybody who attacks or trivializes one side of this fan base. I will feel for the St Louis portion of the fan base if they do in fact lose the team, lets not pretend like any of us knows yet how this will end up, and I will never condone questioning somebody else love for the Rams. If a person from LA made these kind of negative generalizations of people in St Louis I would be just as hard on them. Sorry badnews but you are way out of line with that statement.

Wow.
I never pointed any fingers at anyone here. None whatsoever.

But I'm not out of line with the statement that many of the most vocal LA supporters were kids when they moved.
Clearly I touched a nerve with you... but I think perhaps you took my statement personally. You shouldn't have. My comments were pre-emptive to the possible move. And directed solely towards those who fit the bill. I KNOW MANY OF YOU HAVE BEEN AND REMAIN PASSIONATE FANS.
Frankly, this is my team just as much as it is any other fans.
I'm the guy who might lose his team so excuse me for not being cool about it.
Fuck anyone who feels like they have more right to this team than I do.

 

[RamzFanz]

The Rams do in fact have the right to relocate which is in the lease and it was triggered when the lease was breached on March 1 , 2015.

How was the lease breached?

 

[The Ripper]

How was the lease breached?

The stadiums was required to be top tier on March 1, 2015.

 

[LosAngelesRams]

I've made it clear many times I don't care where the Rams play I am a Rams fan. I want them to stay in the NFC West with their current rivals but other than that they can play on Mars for all I care. I have not and will not celebrate the pain of anybody in St Louis over possibly losing our team. I have not and will not question their love for our team. I was really with you until I came to the part I quoted and put in bold.

How dare you question people not in St Louis' love for the Rams. Casual Rams fans until '99??? Who are you to play revisionist history and claim LA fans weren't diehard RAms fans. You sit there and give us your story on you and your family loving the Rams and tell us the lengths that you go to in supporting them. Then you turn around after asking everybody to empathize with you and other St Louis area fans and question other peoples devotion to the Rams.

As for the people you say are too young to be LA Rams fans has it ever dawned on you that those very people are just like your daughter whom you raised to love your favorite team? Is it so far out of the realm of possibility that there is a 16 year old just like young miss badnews that was raised by her daddy to love his favorite team also?

This is coming from somebody who never has and never will live in Los Angeles or St Louis. This is coming from somebody who travels to St Louis yearly to support the Rams, somebody that drives to San Francisco and has been to all but 1 game in San Francisco for the last 25 years. This is from somebody who travels to Seattle, Arizona and Denver to cheer on our Rams. I just can't support or agree with anybody who attacks or trivializes one side of this fan base. I will feel for the St Louis portion of the fan base if they do in fact lose the team, lets not pretend like any of us knows yet how this will end up, and I will never condone questioning somebody else love for the Rams. If a person from LA made these kind of negative generalizations of people in St Louis I would be just as hard on them. Sorry badnews but you are way out of line with that statement.

My son's 6, he's a Rams fan!

 

[RamzFanz]

The stadiums was required to be top tier on March 1, 2015.

Or what?

 

[The Ripper]

Or what?

They were in breach of the lease. Ramifications are triggered by a breach. Prior to the amended lease the Rams had to sue to determine if they were in breach the addition of arbitration removed the need to go to court for a breach.

 

[dbrooks25]

The stadiums was required to be top tier on March 1, 2015.

Funny, Dave Peacock was just on with the Cardinals (baseball) crew a few moments ago and he himself said it wasn't a "breach" of the contract. He did say the end result is the Rams are now in a year to year lease as a result of the dome not being in top tier and this is where we are. He also said a breach was when Kroenke committed to games in London, but the organization made things right on that front. He knows more about this stuff than any of us, so yeah, I'm gonna roll with him though I already knew this.

 

[D L]

Funny, Dave Peacock was just on with the Cardinals (baseball) crew a few moments ago and he himself said it wasn't a "breach" of the contract. He did say the end result is the Rams are now in a year to year lease as a result of the dome not being in top tier. He knows more about this stuff than any of us, so yeah, I'm gonna roll with him though I already knew this.

Nope. Doesn't matter. He knows nothing.

 

[badnews]

I've made it clear many times I don't care where the Rams play I am a Rams fan. I want them to stay in the NFC West with their current rivals but other than that they can play on Mars for all I care. I have not and will not celebrate the pain of anybody in St Louis over possibly losing our team. I have not and will not question their love for our team. I was really with you until I came to the part I quoted and put in bold.

How dare you question people not in St Louis' love for the Rams. Casual Rams fans until '99??? Who are you to play revisionist history and claim LA fans weren't diehard RAms fans. You sit there and give us your story on you and your family loving the Rams and tell us the lengths that you go to in supporting them. Then you turn around after asking everybody to empathize with you and other St Louis area fans and question other peoples devotion to the Rams.

As for the people you say are too young to be LA Rams fans has it ever dawned on you that those very people are just like your daughter whom you raised to love your favorite team? Is it so far out of the realm of possibility that there is a 16 year old just like young miss badnews that was raised by her daddy to love his favorite team also?

This is coming from somebody who never has and never will live in Los Angeles or St Louis. This is coming from somebody who travels to St Louis yearly to support the Rams, somebody that drives to San Francisco and has been to all but 1 game in San Francisco for the last 25 years. This is from somebody who travels to Seattle, Arizona and Denver to cheer on our Rams. I just can't support or agree with anybody who attacks or trivializes one side of this fan base. I will feel for the St Louis portion of the fan base if they do in fact lose the team, lets not pretend like any of us knows yet how this will end up, and I will never condone questioning somebody else love for the Rams. If a person from LA made these kind of negative generalizations of people in St Louis I would be just as hard on them. Sorry badnews but you are way out of line with that statement.

Btw- I made it CLEAR that there are many old LA fans who are diehard and have supported this team. Some who post here.

So you tell me what generalizations I made that were offensive?

Seriously. Why the harsh response?
Maybe you should read more carefully before making accusations.