New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[bluecoconuts]

That was my point, that counting on LA politicians to help was unrealistic, not that official government intervention was likely. I didn't bring this angle up as a topic, I only responded to your assertion that politicians from LA would have some greater effect on any process.

I wasnt trying to say someone in LA had more pull, I was more saying that CA has their own representatives, so thinking that someone from Missouri would argue that if the Rams left they should go after the NFL legally, its likely to be challenged, and my guess is die before anything happens.

 

[blue4]

A friend of mine owned a Subway. He was between selling and closing because he was kind of done with the local market. The HC supplied him with all kinds of demographic info from other markets to get him to move instead of closing. They did also send out a marketing team to see if they could help his presence and other things to capture more of the market but they were all over helping him move into other areas in order to keep him as a franchisee. He finally sold his franchise a few months ago. And I forgot one thing about it. One of the things that clinched it for him was that they allowed a Subway to go in to the Walmart just a few hundred yards from his store. So much for protecting a franchisee's market.

Still doesn't seem to fit because the local market wasn't worth serving. St Louis, the local market, is actually thriving despite poor performance from the franchise. The Rams aren't going to shut down. And Subway apparently had a plan in place to serve the market. Obviously, I can't know what happened to your friend, but I still think the Subway analogy put forth earlier actually works more in favor of St Louis than LA, but using any business as comparable to the NFL is flawed anyway IMO.

 

[blue4]

Unrelated, but I noticed this in the window of a building across from.my apartment, and thought it was funny. Anyone wanna get in business with Stan?

Tread carefully. And read the fine print of that lease. Tell him you want the property maintained at a top 25 level or you walk.

 

[Boffo97]

It's me (confused again).

Isn't the NFL a monopoly now? That's why they have the exemption?

For all intents and purposes, they are. And just like other major sports leagues, they kind of need to be in order to work. After all, if the government came and broke it all up, so that, say, the USFL and XFL could reform and get some of the really good players, we'd have three mediocre leagues instead of one good one.

That said, the exemption is kind of a gentlemen's agreement with the NFL that they won't abuse their status as a monopoly or otherwise be jerks. It doesn't stop lawsuits against the League for behaving like a monopoly though.

i thought it was, you try to shoot down anything anyone says about a St Louis stadium, then you build up anything about LA, you try to act like anything St Louis does is too little too late. we all know you want the Rams in LA but don't try to state as fact your opinions.

I am neither the enemy nor the topic of conversation at hand. If you feel compelled to try to make this thread about me, then I respectfully suggest that it might be a good idea to take a break from this thread.

Yes, I both prefer the Rams move back to Los Angeles, and feel that that's ultimately going to happen. That is allowed in this thread. It is also allowed to prefer the Rams stay in St. Louis and/or feel that that is ultimately going to happen.

this last sentence is pure BS, you have no idea what the league can or will do if they don't want Stan to move, stop trying to state as fact your opinion.

I can and will make an educated guess that the League will not enforce their bylaws. I am not alone in that opinion. I am no more stating this educated guess/opinion as fact than those who insist the League will enforce their bylaws, even to the point of locking an unwilling Stan into St. Louis, are stating their educated guess/opinion as fact.

And I will point out that this does not equate to saying that it's absolutely set that the Rams WILL move. I just believe that the efforts of Peacock, Blitz and others would be far more better suited to making Stan want to stay than they would relying on the bylaws to be enforced the way St. Louisans would prefer.

If it makes you feel better, I will say this. EVERYTHING I have posted or will post is my educated guess/opinion. I have the same level of access to the NFL workings or what Stan is thinking as anyone else here... namely zero. I would have thought that would have been self evident. Now, if you're just mad that I'm expressing opinions you don't like.... well... sucks to be you. Just like it would suck to be me if I felt that way about your opinions.

It's completely relevant to your analogy. No way Subway lets a healthy store move from on replace to another without some way of keeping the current market satisfied. It's easier to open another store to serve everyone, how is that not relevant? Seems obvious to me that the optimal arrangement from a business perspective is to move the Raiders. Using the franchise analogy.

In this case though, the market wouldn't be left completely unsatisfied as there IS a cross-town (or really, cross-state) store. And the possibility remains that another franchise owner could move into the old neighborhood.

Plus, and I think this will be a MAJOR factor in what's going to happen, whether the store is "healthy" as well as other standards in the bylaws are completely subjective. As such, these standards CAN be answered in any way that the NFL and/or Stan find convenient. Another one of those subjective standards is whether or not the riverfront stadium proposal is a "good faith" effort. IF one's goal was to declare it not to be, it wouldn't be hard to make an argument even if many found it ridiculous.

 

[Username]

They said a bunch of stuff about the press conference on my drive home today with some extra tidbits at the end on 101. Some cool shit. Said the stadium would be considered part of the CityArchRiver project with concerts and a bunch of other stuff. There will be a museum built next to the stadium about "Westward Expansion," etc. Some other things too but I can't remember.

I really hope Peacock and Nixon can keep this up. They have exceeded my expectations so far by doing so much so fast. Is this state finally doing something right for a change?

 

[Boffo97]

This is another article on the St. Louis side that I feel makes good points... but if there's any reason why stlmag.com or Ray Hartmann should be taken with a grain of salt, please let me know:

http://www.stlmag.com/news/stan-kroenke's-forgotten-options/

Stan Kroenke's Forgotten Options
Why any new-stadium idea is dead unless the Rams leave St. Louis

by Ray Hartmann


February 10, 2015

2:59 PM

St. Louis is no stranger to tortured “conversations” about the public benefit of building new football stadiums. On average, it seems to convene one per decade.

But this one has entered a parallel universe. It is incoherent.

Gov. Jay Nixon held a press conference today to announce some stirring new development on moving infrastructure to pave the way for a new football stadium on the riverfront for the “purpose of making sure St. Louis remains an NFL city now and for years to come.” But there was one slight omission: Nixon largely ignored the team that presently plays here.

There was a reason for this, one that seems lost on many in the local media: The St. Louis Rams do not need a new stadium to play here. Owner Stan Kroenke possesses nine—count em’, nine—one-year options to play football in the Edward Jones Dome through the 2024 season. That’s one year at a time, at the cost of postage on a certified letter, plus the lowest rent of any team in the NFL. He exercised one such option just two weeks ago.

In case you missed it, Kroenke has launched an all-out attempt to relocate the Rams to Los Angeles. By most estimates, he would more than double—even triple—the value of his franchise, which is presently ranked 32nd out of 32 teams by Forbes.com.

Now, for the sake of discussion only, let’s say St. Louis is successful in the apparent strategy to impress NFL executives and owners with its new stadium, so much so that they thwart Kroenke’s move to Los Angeles. Even were it to stop him in the short run, does anyone really believe he would then reward that effort by writing a $200 million check to fund a new stadium that he doesn’t own in St. Louis, giving up his renewal options and the free agency that’s arguably worth more than the team itself?

Really?

And that’s not even taking into account Kroenke’s sweetheart deal at the dome, where he pays less for rent ($25,000 per game) than it costs to operate the building and where he receives naming rights, all of the concessions, and three-fourths of signage revenues. That lease has long been regarded as among the most generous in the NFL.

If Los Angeles isn’t available to Kroenke in 2016, is he going to give up the prospect of that city in 2017 or 2018? Or would he perhaps move the Rams to London, where he owns Arsenal, one of the most prestigious soccer teams in the world? And, for that matter, what about other U.S. cities that might emerge as an opportunity to upgrade his last-place rank in franchise value?

Reasonable people can differ about Kroenke’s odds of success in getting to Los Angeles. That’s all speculation at this point. Ditto for what the NFL executives and owners are thinking. Some reports have them grateful to Kroenke. Others (preferred by the local sports media) see them as great friends of St. Louis.

I certainly wouldn’t bet against Kroenke, not with his resources and his Inglewood land purchase and the official support that he seems to have gained. But no one has a crystal ball to predict that outcome. Nor can anyone say for sure whether St. Louis would have much of a chance to secure another NFL franchise if the Rams leave.

Personally, I think it would be a terrible misuse of public resources to fork over a half a billion dollars for a new NFL stadium, whether for the Rams or any other team. I say that after having reluctantly supported the dome project a quarter-century ago.

But it doesn’t matter what I think or what anyone else thinks about a new NFL stadium, as long as Kroenke owns the Rams in St. Louis. This isn’t a matter of speculation. It’s a matter of common sense: Kroenke isn’t about to bankroll that stadium if its backers succeed in blowing up his plan. And he isn’t about to walk away from his freedom to move to please a city that he just tried to leave.

So if you’re rooting for football in a new NFL stadium downtown, don't worry about the Rams leaving. Worry about them staying.

SLM co-owner Ray Hartmann is a panelist on KETC Channel 9’s Donnybrook, which airs Thursdays at 7 p.m.

 

[Username]

No matter how selfish that might be... I would never look down on a man who was able to do this. You have an excellent imagination Brudda.

Get your ass down here so I can take you fishing.

Hahaha I wish. No more relatives in the Keys, so I have no excuse to be drunk in Florida anymore. I actually might be going to Hawaii soon for work though. So I got that goin for me, which is nice.

 

[tonyl711]

For the record, again, I want the Rams to stay in St Louis. While I live in LA now, I won't be here forever, and I don't have time to go see a game anyway, so them playing here doesn't matter. I don't have time for Kings games either, I work a little over 100 hours a week. When I finish school I plan on moving to St Louis temporarily while I get things set up with work, so my girlfriend (who is from St Louis) can be closer to her family for a little while. In fact, we own property in St Louis, her mother gave us a house that she owns the deed to. So to me personally it's better if they stay. I'll have time to watch them and go to games when I'm there.

So if the leave then I'll be moving there and won't have any of my favorite teams around, other than when the Kings come to town. Granted I won't be there very long either, but chances are after St Louis I won't be going back to Southern California, unless Cal Tech, or UCLA or something hires me, which I don't think happens.

So as far as I'm considered I'll have a small window to watch the Rams in person, and I'll be in St Louis. If the Rams aren't there, then it doesn't help me.

However I try to look at things as a realist, right now things have been trending towards LA. There's far fewer things holding them up in the process. If its really a race between the two cities then LA seemed to have a big lead. Apparently they have one more vote, which most expect to be an easy pass, and then they have all their ducks in a row. If Stan isn't serious then it doesn't matter, but it really looks like he's serious, and I dont expect the NFL to block something they have openly stated they want.

I understand all of this, what pisses me off is how anyone can say with any amount of certainty whats going to happen with this, and how if anyone says anything that might be positive about St Louis stadium plans they are scoffed at as pie in the sky hopes, as I have stated no one knows how this will end up, and no ones opinion is any better than anyone elses. so stop trying to act like anything positive in LA is just hows its going to be and acting like St Louis is just chasing a dream.

 

[Username]

@RandyKarraker
Why weren't Peacock & Blitz at @GovJayNixon press conference? Because they're meeting with the NFL right now.

 

[Prime Time]

Rams chat with Jim Thomas: 2/10/15

http://sports.live.stltoday.com/Event/Rams_chat_with_Jim_Thomas_77?Page=0

The Gov mentioned $10mil per year in lost tax revenue, but why doesn't someone come out and give us an estimate (or even wild guess) as to how much this will cost Mo taxpayers after netting out tax revenue from team operations, players, stadium workers, tourism tax subsidy, etc. I still say it isn't much for the value to city/region

If the basic financing plan is the same _ $24 million a year _ then it's $14 million a year. That breaks down to $5 million a year from the state and $ 2 1/2 million a year apiece from St. Louis City and St. Louis County.
----------
One of the best things about being a Rams fan over the last 7 years has been becoming a fan of the NFL draft. That's sad, but it's true. It also happens to segue nicely into fanship of the woebegone Jacksonville Jaguars. What do you think are the chances that, if the Rams leave, STL can build the stadium anyway and lure the Jags by 2020? I know you've said Khan is trying to make it work there, but perhaps there's a chance anyway. FWIW, I hope the Jags move down to pick Scherff...

I don't think there's any chance the Jaguars will be here in 2020.
---------
If I remember right, you have previously said 45-55 rams leave. Change yet?

No, still at 45-55. I have this internal tug telling me to lower the odds but I haven't yet.
--------
Jim, do you think that Kroenke and Peacock's convo at the SB will lead to a more meaningful discussion?

It wasn't like a sit-down meeting. It was more casual talk at a party to my knowledge. But it can't hurt.
----------
In the continuum that is the NFL policy to approve a team move, what comes next for Kronke? At what point does it become "official" that he's moving? It seems to me that there is a lot of posturing going on.

If he goes by league rules _ and all indications are that he will _ he cannot file for relocation until next year at this time. (And that's assuming the league OKs relocation requests for 2016).
---------
will the vote on a new stadium be up to the public? if it is do you think it would pass?

Whether the public has to vote on the financing of a new stadium is to be determined. I kind of think that if it reaches the point where it's up for a vote that it would pass.
---------
Jim, any whispers that Peacock's true end game is fronting a local ownership group for the Rams or another NFL team in STL?

Haven't heard that one. But at this point, I rule out nothing.
---------
Do you think the Rams will have Fanfest again before the start of the regular season? I would love to be there to hear Demoff speak like last year. Last year he was asking aloud where fans would like the stadium to be located (County vs. Downtown) and when the stadium is built what new jersey colors fans would like for the innagural year of the stadium. This year's fanfest would be very awkward..

Yeah, would be awkward. But I'd guess that they probably have a fanfest.
----------
Do the other owners like the idea of no public money for the L.A. stadium. Won't that set a precedent for future stadiums in other cities?

Won't set a precedent. The public-private partnership is the way of the world these days in almost all new stadium construction.
---------
Jim I think I read that the LA stadium Kroenke is proposing is a dome. Is that true, the pictures look like a dome. I thought the weather in SoCa was always great, why not open air, smog, LAX noise?!!

I think it's retractable. Not positive.
---------
Hello from Jacksonville where the owner of the local NFL team is engaged in the community and has made commitments to not only keeping Jags in town but also made Jacksonville become a better place a top priority. I wish he could have completed the purchase of the Rams.

Which is what I've been saying for a while.
----------
Now that the league has formed a committee to oversee the LA situation do you think this a positive or negative development when it comes to the Rams relocating?

I don't view it that way. It's just another move by the league to try to control the LA market as much as possible, and keep the process as orderly as possible.
--------
Hey Jim, any thoughts on this LA committee that the NFL put together? Do any of the owners on it help or hurt our cause (committee is comprised of NFL team owners Clark Hunt (Kansas City), Robert Kraft (New England), John Mara (New York Giants), Bob McNair (Houston), Jerry Richardson (Carolina) and Art Rooney (Pittsburgh).)?

Here's what I wrote about today: "There are no real mavericks in the group. Hunt, Mara and Rooney are sons of old-school owners. One would think that McNair wouldn't necessarily be in favor of relocation in general because he would be protective of the San Antonio market.

Kraft is considered one of commissioner Roger Goodell's closest friends, although who knows if that's still the case after the "Deflategate" controversy and the fact that Kraft wants an apology from the league if the Patriots are cleared of wrong-doing in the matter." Also Hunt, Mara, Rooney are sons of old-school owners. With that upbringing, you would think they'd try to be more in line with Goodell's thinking or what's best for the league (and not Stan). But there's no way of knowing for sure.
---------
Jim, I find it hard to believe that the governor of a state and the former president of the largest beer producer and distributor in the world are putting this much work into this if they didn't receive some type of assurance from the NFL that they would make sure there is a team (Rams or otherwise) to fill this stadium. Am I missing something? I know nothing is built yet, but why go through the work they've gone through if they aren't 100% positive that St. Louis will have a team?

Because St. Louis is a town that fights for what it wants. And right now they're fighting to keep the NFL in St. Louis. Trust me, there are no promises in this matter. But it would be hard for the NFL to turn its back on a team that offered to build a new stadium twice in little more than 20 years.
---------
A particular piece of these stadium dynamics has been nagging at me: the $400M of Kroenke's money that Peacock's team is including in its plan. If the NFL upholds its bylaws, it will be telling Kroenke he has to spend $400M of Rams or his own money on a new stadium in STL. His counterargument might be that he's already spent money to build a stadium in LA, so does the NFL want him to build _two_stadiums, solving the league's LA problem _and_ building a new stadium for STL?

Stan can afford to build about 5. But he hasn't spent any money yet in LA.
---------
Just curious. If the new stadium does indeed get built do the PSL's transfer with it or are new ones sold?

Obviously it's a legit question. But I believe you'll have to buy another PSL. Although the fact that you own one may get you preferred parking and first preference on where your seat in the new stadium will be.
--------
If Kronke is indeed moving dirt in Inglewood, it seems to me that he either has the necessary votes needed for approval, is one heck of a gambler, or will assume whatever costs the NFL and lawsuits result in. Am I missing something here?

I'm pretty sure the dirt that is being moved is in other areas of the redevelopment project, not the stadium part.
--------
My question is: How much money has Kroenke put into the LA stadium project, is that money revocable (e.g. could he sell his interest to someone else without having put down any $ of his own), and do you see the NFL committee as having the fortitude to tell him no, even if he's building a big stadium in LA, effectively forcing him to rent that grand new complex to one of his relocation rivals?

I don't think he's put much into the LA project as of yet other than the land purchase and perhaps some design and consultant work. It'll be very interesting if construction on the Inglewood stadium actually starts without league approval. Obviously, it becomes easier for the league to tell Stan no if there's a completed stadium plan in St. Louis, i.e., land purchased, financing approved. Until that happens, the league doesn't have to tell Stan anything.
---------
At what point will we know if 15 is going to be a lame duck season or not?

Almost certainly won't be until after the season is completed. And that's when Kroenke would file for relocation if the league says it's OK.
---------
We hear that Peacock is talking to the Rams to keep them informed on stadium proposal progress. Yet, Demhoff seems to act like he is not in the loop. If Peacock is not talking to Kroenke, who is he talking to in the Rams org. ?Thanks

What makes you think Peacock is not talking to Demoff?
----------
Jim, as a native of LA and lifetime Rams fan, you know I am hoping the Rams move back west. What do you think of this committee stuff with the NFL, when most of the owners on it voted no, when Georgia moved the Rams to St. Louis. I think this is a done deal Jim, with the NFL covering their butt, hoping St. Louis builds that HOK Stadium, which I love by the way, for an expansion team, sometime in the future, after all St. Louis should have gotten one in 1994.

I can't see expansion any time in the near future. I think having another team (San Diego or Oakland) relocate to St. Louis would be a more likely scenario here than expansion.
--------
Jim,,asked earlier about the Goodell Committee...any thoughts on how you think Clark Hunt would lean regarding the Rams? Thinking he would support St. Louis being a NFL city.

I do not. I'd think he'd support St. Louis being an NFL city. Because there will be a time in the future that he might want some state money to help refurbish Arrowhead and build a new stadium. I realize that given the recent renovations there that might be a couple of decades down the road. But I wouldn't think you'd turn your back now on the eastern side of the state.
-----------
If financing gets finalized for the new stadium, before this time next year do think Kroenke will "settle" for STL's offer? Or still try to file for relocation? Or try to sell the team?

Now that's the question isn't it? (Or questions) I do know this, that would make it very difficult for the league to simply turn it's back on St. Louis. Let's see if it gets that far.
---------
Since neither Kronke nor the Rams has said publically that a move in 2016 is official, why is the league leaking the memo that the rules will have to be followed? Aren't Kronke's plans pretty obvious?

Yeah, I would say Kroenke's plans are no secret.
--------
Using $5mil per year from the state, that amounts to about $2 per average taxpayer and less than $1 per resident. Gives the $450m public contribution a little perspective.

That's a great point.
--------
It seems to me you don't really build a stadium thinking you'll only use it 8 times a year. You expect and plan to schedule many, many other events. But STL already has 2 large facilities for other events. Wouldn't a new stadium negatively impact the revenue streams of Busch and the Dome?

No. It's just the opposite.. The idea of this new stadium is to free up the Dome (which is part of the convention center) for the five-six months it's in use by the football team. With the freedom to use the Dome 12 months a year, estimates are that it would lead to $20 million in additional revenue there annually. And remember, the plans are to pursue an MLS soccer team to play in the new stadium as well.
--------
Certainly Kronke putting up his money to build a new stadium in Inglewood moves him to the front of the line (over the Chargers and Raiders) does it not? How can it not? The only thing the NFL has to do is juggle a few of their rules. Done deal in in my mind.

Obviously it gives him the edge. But what if next month the Chargers agree to sell 35% of their team to the Anschutz group at Farmer's Field? Many in LA, and at least some in the league prefer the downtown site. And again, moving the Rams to LA does not solve the California problem, i.e., getting badly needed stadiums _ that are in much worse shape than the Dome _ built in San Diego and Oakland.
---------
How much emphasis do you think the NFL will put on the inevitable decline in attendance this season when deciding our Rams' fate?

I can't tell you how much, but I'm sure they'll look at it.
---------
what did the stl fan base do to deserve this?

Not the best in terms of club ownership, and not the best in terms of proactive local political and business leadership. It would've been a lot easier and cheaper if a new stadium was built for Bill Bidwill in the 80s; it would have been a lot easier and cheaper had there not been the stadium lease dispute during the expansion process in the early '90s; it would've been a lot easier and cheaper if the local officials negotiating the Dome lease with the Rams would've said: "We'll agree to top-16 language in the lease, but not top-8" a few years later.
---------
Will the NFL ever make ESK comply with the cross-ownership rules? it seems like he's had plenty of time to figure something out, but the league is no hurry to make him.

They gave him a six-month extension. He has a few months left on that extension.

 

[bluecoconuts]

I understand all of this, what pisses me off is how anyone can say with any amount of certainty whats going to happen with this, and how if anyone says anything that might be positive about St Louis stadium plans they are scoffed at as pie in the sky hopes, as I have stated no one knows how this will end up, and no ones opinion is any better than anyone elses. so stop trying to act like anything positive in LA is just hows its going to be and acting like St Louis is just chasing a dream.

There's no need to be angry, 99% of what's in this thread is just ideas and speculation based on the very little information that has been released. Nobody knows what's going on behind the scenes with either project, we just know what they tell us. At this point, given the information out there, it certainly seems that Stan is looking to LA, and it certainly seems that the Rams are leaning towards leaving. That doesn't mean things can't change, they're likely going to go back and fourth. Some of the issues that I have personally with a lot of the arguments in favor of St Louis (which again is what I want) is that they're hinge on the NFL blocking a move and forcing Stan to stay (which I have no faith in them doing) or they fail to realize any potential issues, and assume the offer should just be taken with little to no negotiation, and if he doesn't make a counter proposal then too bad he has to take it anyway. I don't see how that is a smart tactic in any negotiation, let alone one that involves hundreds of millions to potentially billions of dollars. I wish that Stan would come back with a counter proposal so we can see what we have to work with, but at this point he's not obligated to, and doesn't appear to be doing so either. Perhaps with a few ducks in a row in terms of acquiring land he'll look at making one, but if he doesn't then why would the stance be to stand pat and hope that he just wakes up at changes his mind?

 

[Selassie I]

Hahaha I wish. No more relatives in the Keys, so I have no excuse to be drunk in Florida anymore. I actually might be going to Hawaii soon for work though. So I got that goin for me, which is nice.

I can give you a great excuse to get drunk here.

Hawaii , Yeah. Me too in July. Brah.


The 39th "whatever it is" to the Dalai Lama says that our path's will meet at some point.

 

[beej]

If we build Kroenke a stadium in stl, can we work it into the deal that his team maintains a top 25% winning record for the next 15 years, or we have the option to kick them out year to year?

 

[RamBill]

St. Louis football again in the not-always-great outdoors?
• By Tim O'Neil

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_ebe00aea-e8c6-5f28-82d1-46b362bbc0e5.html

ST. LOUIS • On the early evening of Sunday, Jan. 23, 2000, light snow fell. It was 19 degrees, with a biting 13 mph wind from the north.

Inside the Trans World Dome, the Rams beat the Tampa Bay Buccaneers 11-6 to advance to Super Bowl XXXIV. The house exploded in delight to Ricky Proehl’s dramatic touchdown catch with 4:44 left to propel the St. Louis Rams on to a championship, their first and last.

Which set of facts do St. Louisans remember?

Since 1995, the Rams have played 161 games inside the formerly “state of the art” indoor stadium downtown, now known as the Edward Jones Dome. The Dome affords fans the luxury of mostly ignoring the outside weather, with the staff keeping the temperature inside from 68 to 70 degrees.

But the vagaries of the great outdoors are of renewed interest because of an effort to keep the Rams in town by building a new open-air stadium on the riverfront northeast of the Dome. The franchise has declared itself free of its lease and has promised only to stay here next season. The future beyond that is murky.

If a new outdoor stadium actually is built — and if the Rams or another team play in it — St. Louis NFL fans will be needing their umbrellas, parkas and sunscreen for the first time in decades.

So, what has the weather been like outside while fans sat through 161 games inside the Dome? Generally, it has been pretty good, befitting autumn in the Midwest. The temperature at kickoff was in the 50s, 60s or 70s for more than half of games.

But anyone with a passing knowledge of local weather knows how wild the swings can be. Outdoor temperatures at kickoff have ranged from 13 to 90 degrees.

Just the range of temperatures in January can be wide. On Jan. 27, 2002, when the Greatest Show on Turf beat the Philadelphia Eagles 29-24 to advance to their second Super Bowl in three seasons, it was a pleasant 67 degrees at game time.

Not so on Jan. 3, 2010, when the temperature at kickoff was 13 degrees, with below-zero wind chill. Only a few brave tailgaters gathered before that last game of a bad season, and most of them huddled inside tents. “The hash browns are refreezing again,” said fan Bill Rinehart of Pacific as he hunched next to a propane heater.

The weather was a major factor for the sparse crowd, but probably not the only one. The Rams lost to the San Francisco 49ers 28-6 to finish the season a numbing 1-15.

According to records of the National Weather Service, the Rams have played in the Dome on 33 days when the outside temperature at kickoff was 40 degrees or lower. On 15 of those, the temperature was 30 or lower, and it was just 13 degrees for two games.

It was at least 80 degrees outside for 17 kickoffs, and 85 or hotter six times. The hottest outdoor temperature at kickoff was 90 on Sept. 6, 1998, when the Rams hosted the New Orleans Saints and lost, 24-17. Disappointed fans walked outside to 95-degree heat. At least it was partly cloudy.

It rained outside at kickoff for six games, and snow fell during four others. Even when the skies were dry at game time, there were times an open stadium would have been a mess from earlier storms:

• On Dec. 16, 2007, 7 fresh inches of snow were on the ground as the Rams played the Green Bay Packers. It was 27 and sunny for the noon kickoff. Whether the snow kept Rams fans away is hard to know, because the home team was 3-10 going into the game. More than half of the fans in attendance rooted for the Packers, inspiring a Post-Dispatch columnist to describe the Dome as “Lambeau South.” Seven inches of snow is a trifle in Green Bay. The Rams lost the game 33-14, and ended the season 3-13.

• On Sept. 14, 2008, the Rams hosted the New York Giants. Outside for the noon kickoff, conditions were cloudy, 66 degrees and dripping wet. Earlier that morning, the powerful remnants of Hurricane Ike had dumped 5 inches of rain, flooding many streets. It was comfortable inside, except for the score. The Rams lost 41-13 and would end the season a sloppy 2-14.

Of course, St. Louis fans have seen the game outside before. The Rams played their first four games in St. Louis at the old downtown Busch Memorial Stadium (all with pleasant temps in the 60s and 70s) before the Dome opened on Nov. 12, 1995. And the Big Red, formally the St. Louis football Cardinals, played outdoors from 1960 to 1987, first at the former Sportsman’s Park and then at Busch Memorial Stadium. Fans mainly remember the exciting Cardiac Cards of the mid-1970s, frustration over bad draft picks and mediocre records, but nature inflicted a few memorable discomforts.

On Dec. 18, 1983, it was 10 degrees at kickoff against the Philadelphia Eagles. It was so cold that Tony Franklin, the visitors’ kicker known for his barefoot kicking style, wore a shoe. The home team won, 31-7.

And on Thanksgiving Day 1975, 7 inches of fresh snow enabled frustrated fans a redress of grievances through snowballs, which they rained upon the Big Red bench and — cruelly — upon the young woman wearing a sequined bird mascot suit. St. Louis lost to the Buffalo Bills, 32-14.

David Peacock, one of the civic leaders tapped by Gov. Jay Nixon to lead planning for a new, domeless stadium, said he was confident that local fans would deal with the weather, whatever it may bring.

“Our weather is crazy and unpredictable, but it’s what we all grew up with,” said Peacock, a former Anheuser-Busch president. “There are plenty of open-air stadiums in cities with worse weather. I go back to Dan Dierdorf (former Big Red offensive tackle), who said he never had a problem playing in bad weather. I believe the fans will be there.”

Char Schellenberg of south St. Louis County, a leader of the group Keep the Rams in St. Louis, said she’d like to see a stadium with a retractable roof — something that Peacock said wouldn’t be worth the estimated $300 million add-on. Schellenberg and her husband are longtime Rams season-ticket holders, as they were during part of the Big Red era.

“Those games were fun, but it could get cold,” she said. “With the Dome, it might be hot or cold when we walk to the game, but it’s always comfortable inside.”

So, would she follow the team outdoors? “Absolutely.”
A look at 161 games in the Dome

Hottest game at kickoff: 90 degrees, on Sept. 6, 1998

Coldest: 13 degrees twice, on Dec. 21, 2008, and Jan. 3, 2010

Games in the 50s, 60s or 70s: 86

Games with rain or snow at kickoff: 10

 

[Boffo97]

If we build Kroenke a stadium in stl, can we work it into the deal that his team maintains a top 25% winning record for the next 15 years, or we have the option to kick them out year to year?

I realize there's all but certainly blue font missing from that message... but it does allow me a segue to post some interesting research I found.

I think we all agree that the lease the Rams signed gave them ridiculously favorable terms, including the top tier clause. Not only did St. Louis feel (all but certainly correctly) that they HAD to have such terms to bring the Rams (or any other team) to St. Louis, but the CVC themselves actually filed antitrust charges against the NFL that the bylaws made it too difficult to get a team back in St. Louis.

The CVC's suit was dismissed, due to issues with the plaintiffs' case, as well as the fact that, at least according to this source, they didn't contact any other teams except the Rams.

I leave it to you all to draw whatever conclusions you wish. I just thought it was interesting. http://economics.mit.edu/files/1380

 

[Rmfnlt]

Still doesn't seem to fit because the local market wasn't worth serving. St Louis, the local market, is actually thriving despite poor performance from the franchise. The Rams aren't going to shut down. And Subway apparently had a plan in place to serve the market. Obviously, I can't know what happened to your friend, but I still think the Subway analogy put forth earlier actually works more in favor of St Louis than LA, but using any business as comparable to the NFL is flawed anyway IMO.

This made me chuckle.

Using the Subway analogy, it's like a Subway serving shyte sandwiches and people lining up to buy them.

How crazy is that?

 

[Prime Time]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...nts-to-give-the-nfl-an-assist-in-los-angeles/

Magic Johnson wants to give the NFL an assist in Los Angeles
Posted by Darin Gantt on February 11, 2015

Getty Images

On the national sports scene, nothing is bigger than the NFL brand at the moment.

But in Los Angeles, Magic Johnson is still the man, and he’s offering his assistance to whomever wants to bring football back to his city.

Johnson told Jarrett Bell of USA Today that he could envision becoming involved with whatever team ends up in L.A., whenever that happens.

The former Lakers great has stakes in the Dodgers, the WNBA Sparks and the city’s new professional soccer team, though he said he hadn’t been contacted by any of the NFL suitors.

“We helped the Dodgers rebound,” Johnson said. “We’re No. 1 in attendance in baseball; we’ve been that for the last two years. So we know how to take a franchise, elevate it and also sell it to the fans in Los Angeles.

“That’s going to be important to whoever the owner is, to make sure they have someone locally to sell the team to the local market.”

While that sounds self-serving on its face, the NFL has abandoned L.A. twice now, so Johnson’s insight to a town that he knows well could be valuable.

“I know how to do it,” Johnson said. “Whether it’s me or somebody else, I think it’s important. . . .

“Even if I’m not involved, I just want the suite. Seriously, I’m going to be the first one in line to get a suite. So whoever’s coming, even if I’m not a part of it, I’m going to buy my suite and I’m going to be there, just like I was at Raiders games and Rams games. If it’s the Raiders, the Rams, the Chargers – I don’t care who it is – I’m going to be there because I love the NFL and I love football.”

So getting that message out to Rams owner Stan Kroenke — whose stadium plans in Inglewood are near the old Forum where Johnson made so many memories — might be the first step in helping another franchise in town.

 

[bluecoconuts]

NFL Media's Albert Breer Talks LA Committee, Relocation Memo to Teams
Brendan Marks posted on February 10, 2015 11:05

The NFL on Monday sent a memo to franchises that the league as a whole - not one team - will decide whether a franchise can relocate, according to Sam Farmer of the Los Angeles Times.

The memo, provided to the paper by an anonymous source, also informed teams of the league's creation of a Los Angeles committee.

NFL Media's Albert Breer joined Primetime Monday night to discuss the two big developments that could impact the future of the Rams in St. Louis.

Listen to what he had to say here:
[av]http://www.insidestlaudio.com/PrimeTime/020915-1PT.mp3[/av]



http://www.insidestl.com/insideSTLc...ks-LA-Committee-Relocation-Memo-to-Teams.aspx

 

[RamFan503]

I understand all of this, what pisses me off is how anyone can say with any amount of certainty whats going to happen with this, and how if anyone says anything that might be positive about St Louis stadium plans they are scoffed at as pie in the sky hopes, as I have stated no one knows how this will end up, and no ones opinion is any better than anyone elses. so stop trying to act like anything positive in LA is just hows its going to be and acting like St Louis is just chasing a dream.

I think that is a bit of an exaggeration. Many have said the stadium proposal doesn't appear good enough but that St Louis is chasing a dream or doesn't have a shot? Not so much. Most people outside of this though are acknowledging the momentum that is going on in Inglewood and like it or not, that is what is pushing the momentum in St Louis. In that respect, I think St Louis fans should be glad there is something driving the momentum. It would appear that they still have a good shot at keeping the Rams but I'm not sure that would be the case if the Inglewood project hadn't been announced and put on a fast track.

 

[Sum1]

I think that is a bit of an exaggeration. Many have said the stadium proposal doesn't appear good enough but that St Louis is chasing a dream or doesn't have a shot? Not so much. Most people outside of this though are acknowledging the momentum that is going on in Inglewood and like it or not, that is what is pushing the momentum in St Louis. In that respect, I think St Louis fans should be glad there is something driving the momentum. It would appear that they still have a good shot at keeping the Rams but I'm not sure that would be the case if the Inglewood project hadn't been announced and put on a fast track.

I have to disagree. The St. Louis stadium plan was put in motion well before the Inglewood plan.

I think the perception you are describing is exactly what Kroenke is orchestrating to happen. He was aware that the STL plan was going to be announced when it was, so what did he do? He had his Inglewood plan announced 5 days before to make it appear the STL announcement was a reaction. Same thing yesterday...Nixon has a presser to announce a major hurdle, Kroenke gets word out about a development on the Inglewood front.

Dave Peacock has publicly stated he's been working on the stadium project for over a year. Nixon made an official task force this past fall. All of this is prior to the Inglewood announcement. I think the urgency to get a stadium in St. Louis was clear and present and in motion far prior to the Inglewood project, but Kroenke is doing a heckuva job creating a much different perception.