New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[Boffo97]

What tells you that your existing market has failed? As a St. Louis fan, I see the existing market as not having failed. Does this block a move? Who the F knows at this point.

Yeah, that kind of stuck out to me too. St. Louis fans have an excellent argument that the market hasn't failed. But then the problem comes with defining just what that term means. A lot of this seems to be very subjective.

 

[blue4]

"If it's viable and attractive, and they want to go there, I don't see a problem"? Does this apply to everyone or just Stan?

 

[Rmfnlt]

It seems like every answer was full of double talk. Very frustrating to both fan bases.

Seriously.

Why even bother to answer when they're so cloaked in double talk and inuendo?

I find people that do that incredibly frustrating. I'm more of a straight forward talker.

 

[Boffo97]

Seriously.

Why even bother to answer when they're so cloaked in double talk and inuendo?

I find people that do that incredibly frustrating. I'm more of a straight forward talker.

Hey... if nothing else, Grubman has succeeded in bringing St. Louis and L.A. fans into agreement regarding at least part of this issue!

 

[ZigZagRam]

What I take from Grubman's comments, if anything, is that San Diego and Oakland better get to work.

If you’re also asking in that same question, the non-Los Angeles variables, then my answer is, I don’t know. That scale has two parts to it. “Yes” to the new market and “no” to whatever the old market proposes. Although, you know it’s possible that an old market proposes nothing. And if it proposes nothing and it’s not viable.

 

[Prime Time]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/02/13/st-louis-could-become-the-nfls-new-los-angeles/

St. Louis could become the NFL’s new Los Angeles
Posted by Mike Florio on February 13, 2015

Getty Images

Rams owner Stan Kroenke seems to be intent on building a new stadium in Inglewood. Missouri Governor Jay Nixon seems to be intent on building a new stadium in St. Louis. Both circumstances could become very useful for the NFL.

As explained by Bernie Miklasz of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Nixon’s Plan A has become keeping the Rams in St. Louis. Plan B has become positioning St. Louis to lure another franchise to town.

Per Miklasz, Nixon has identified “core principles” for the stadium project, including placing the stadium “in an area of existing blight,” compliance with environmental regulations, payment of competitive wages for construction, meaningful re-use of the Edward Jones Dome, ownership of the stadium by the public not the team, and no new taxes.

Miklasz also reports that Nixon has made it clear to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell that the project is “serious,” and that Nixon is fully engaged in the process.

None of it may matter to Kroenke, who already has made it clear that he’ll build a stadium in Ingelwood, a project that Mayor James Butts made clear on Thursday’s PFT Live on NBC Sports Radio that Inglewood fully intends to build the kind of stadium that will lure one or two NFL teams.

Eventually, it could be a win-win-win-win — even if it doesn’t feel that way for St. Louis for about a decade or so. First, L.A. gets the Rams. Second, the Rams get L.A. Third, the NFL gets a new L.A. in St. Louis, which would become the perennial leverage point for teams that want new stadiums in their existing cities. Fourth, St. Louis gets a new team — eventually. Maybe.

The last time an NFL team left St. Louis, it took seven years to replace the Cardinals with the Rams. This time around it could take longer. Maybe it will never happen at all. Until it does (even if it never does), St. Louis becomes the “or else” in every stadium negotiation in every current city where the NFL does business.

So lose the Rams, gain the Raiders. Or whichever team eventually, and inevitably, finds itself unable to get a new building in its current town.

 

[ZigZagRam]

If the Rams leave and St. Louis gets another team, it will be sooner rather than later, unlike what Florio is suggesting.

The majority of the public financing for this stadium is going to be coming in the way of the re-financing of the Dome bonds, but the main reason why they're so willing to do that right now is because interest rates are so low. Throw in the fact that the bonds expire in 2022, and you have another more concrete deadline.

Add in the fact that a relocating owner is not going to get the same 'deal' Kroenke is getting in the way of the NFL's G-4 loan unless there's some sort of agreement already in place, I think it's before 2020 for a new team, or not at all.

 

[BuiltRamTough]

I think St Louis deserves a franchise and will get another franchise. The riverfront stadium is legit IMO. This is not about St Louis it's about LA. If LA already had 2 teams the Rams wouldn't leave St Louis for another city like OKC or San Antonio. It's a great city for sports trust me I've been to games in the Dome. I had a great experince.

 

[ChrisW]

I think St Louis deserves a franchise and will get another franchise. The riverfront stadium is legit IMO. This is not about St Louis it's about LA. If LA already had 2 teams the Rams wouldn't leave St Louis for another city like OKC or San Antonio. It's a great city for sports trust me I've been to games in the Dome. I had a great experince.

Did I miss something. Have the Rams moved? Let's remember that for the time being St. Louis is their home. We'll address new franchises if the Rams move.

 

[bluecoconuts]

I can think of at least one owner a little south of LA that may disagree with that statement.

Problem is the other guys. I don't believe he has the votes to block a move, and I think he'll have a hard time.convincing them over some of the big name pro move guys, especially since he doesn't have his own solution and just wants it open for leverage.

 

[bluecoconuts]

What tells you that your existing market has failed? As a St. Louis fan, I see the existing market as not having failed. Does this block a move? Who the F knows at this point.

That's a weird issue, because if the Rams move, essentially that means the NFL says the market failed, but then if the market failed why try to bring another team there again? Which they have done quite a few times. Those bylaws are crap and always have been.

 

[TheNine]

His answers are not double talk. He is simply being asked question for which there currently are no concrete answers. Additionally he is not answering the question that I think we all want answered which is "Are the Rams Staying?"

For right on wrong her is my read on the article.

Does the NFL want to expand into LA? : Yes they do and Kronke's plan is a grate way to facilitate that expansion.


Does this means the NFL wants the RAMS in LA? Not Necessarily. They simply want to expand. Kronke's stadium paths that path. While the Rams are clearly one of the teams that could be relocated that doesn't mean that they will or that the NFL has a preference one way or the other whether it is the Rams, Chargers, Raiders, or an expansion team down the line. They are simply an option and if St. Louis doesn't move on a stadium they are a viable option.

Does the NFL want to keep the Rams / a team in St. Louis? Yes they do. Again there are several options for doing this. they could keep the Rams, relocate one of the above mentioned teams or expand. All options are on the table. However my feeling is the more progress we make on a Stadium the more likely it is that the Rams stay and one of the league follows on of the other options for getting a team to LA.

In short the league has 2 goals and all options are on the table right now to move, mix and shift teams in order to achieve BOTH of those goals.

The real question is what the league will do if they get to the point that achieving both of those goals isn't possible.

 

[ChrisW]

His answers are not double talk. He is simply being asked question for which there currently are no concrete answers. Additionally he is not answering the question that I think we all want answered which is "Are the Rams Staying?"

For right on wrong her is my read on the article.

Does the NFL want to expand into LA? : Yes they do and Kronke's plan is a grate way to facilitate that expansion.


Does this means the NFL wants the RAMS in LA? Not Necessarily. They simply want to expand. Kronke's stadium paths that path. While the Rams are clearly one of the teams that could be relocated that doesn't mean that they will or that the NFL has a preference one way or the other whether it is the Rams, Chargers, Raiders, or an expansion team down the line. They are simply an option and if St. Louis doesn't move on a stadium they are a viable option.

Does the NFL want to keep the Rams / a team in St. Louis? Yes they do. Again there are several options for doing this. they could keep the Rams, relocate one of the above mentioned teams or expand. All options are on the table. However my feeling is the more progress we make on a Stadium the more likely it is that the Rams stay and one of the league follows on of the other options for getting a team to LA.

In short the league has 2 goals and all options are on the table right now to move, mix and shift teams in order to achieve BOTH of those goals.

The real question is what the league will do if they get to the point that achieving both of those goals isn't possible.

They are double talk. I could literally copy and paste an answer for the pro STL or pro LA crowd from virtually every answer.

 

[RamFan503]

Seriously.

Why even bother to answer when they're so cloaked in double talk and inuendo?

I find people that do that incredibly frustrating. I'm more of a straight forward talker.

Yeah I kind of get why he may not be able to say anything about certain things but instead of uttering a bunch of nonsensical bullshit that says nothing, why not just say that you really can't answer that at this time in the process. I wonder how many people read that and just figured they didn't understand what he was saying when he really wasn't saying anything in the first place. I suppose he prepared us though in telling us before hand that even his wife says he says a lot of nothing.

Is that green? That depends on if you are one who puts hews of yellow and blue together in order to get green. That green may work for what we are doing but others may want a true green which that may or may not be. In that case, we'd have to look at the two greens to see if one is green or if the other is green. But I can tell you this. If you never mix the blue and yellow, you're not very likely to ever get the green we are after.

 

[Goose]

Problem is the other guys. I don't believe he has the votes to block a move, and I think he'll have a hard time.convincing them over some of the big name pro move guys, especially since he doesn't have his own solution and just wants it open for leverage.

The last report I read on the matter was Spanos had the 9. Or at least thought he did.

 

[RamFan503]

The last report I read on the matter was Spanos had the 9. Or at least thought he did.

Or at least said he did. Meh.

 

[bluecoconuts]

The last report I read on the matter was Spanos had the 9. Or at least thought he did.

To be honest I don't think he does, the article may have been crap as well. There was a few days were people were just throwing out anything to see what sticks. Similar to the story that the Chargers were building their own stadium in LA and teamed up with a financial firm. Just made up crap in hopes something sticks. Most people who are trusted to have good sources seem to indicate that the votes will go his way.

 

[TheNine]

It seems like every answer was full of double talk. Very frustrating to both fan bases.

They are double talk. I could literally copy and paste an answer for the pro STL or pro LA crowd from virtually every answer.

I guess I am more accustomed to these type of answers as the job I work in deals with a lot of grey. From my read the message was pretty clear.

1. We want a team in LA. LAs is doing the right things to get a team there.
2. We want to keep a team in St Louis. St louis is doing the right things to keep a team.
3. We think we can achieve both goals.
4. We have NO CLUE how we are going to do it yet and there are a myriad of options on the table.
5. In the end we may not be able to do both but we are going to try.
6. Until we can see how things play out and until options start falling off the table (A stadium deal falls through etc) there isn't much more we can give you.


Again this doesn't answer the question of whether the Rams are staying or going but it is an honest answer. It's a more detailed way of saying... We do't know. The situation is just more nuanced than we would like right now.

 

[LosAngelesRams]

Hey guys, I allways google "Rams" to read new stuff that pops up and today i noticed this pop up... has this been there and i just never noticed it or what is it? Do they sell Rams gear there or something?

haven't looked into it yet but was just wondering what it is?

 

[Goose]

To be honest I don't think he does, the article may have been crap as well. There was a few days were people were just throwing out anything to see what sticks. Similar to the story that the Chargers were building their own stadium in LA and teamed up with a financial firm. Just made up crap in hopes something sticks. Most people who are trusted to have good sources seem to indicate that the votes will go his way.

Interesting. I am of the belief that right now Stan does not have all the votes he needs. There are parties that are waiting to see how the STL proposal plays out before committing one way or another. Now that doesn't mean he won't get the votes regardless I just think we are still to early in the process. Old school owners don't seem to favor the musical chair games when it comes to franchises moving.