New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[Sum1]

The Chargers got 20 years of access into a market they had no right to. I'm not going to have sympathy if they lose that access. And if they are fucked without this access to a market outside their own, it's their own fault.

That said, it's all but certain L.A. won't have a team next year. In addition to Goodell's proclamation that no would move there this year, the deadline for filing for relocation passed yesterday. The only way left for a move to happen is an owner going rogue with a midnight move, and I don't see Stan doing that until and unless it seems he's not going to get what he wants through the process. And the Raiders and Chargers really CAN'T do that as they would have no long term plans for a place to play.

I think you are losing what the Chargers are saying. They aren't looking for sympathy from anyone. They are setting the groundwork for bowing out of San Diego. It's as simple as that...they are telling San Diego, 'hey, we've played this game with you for 14 years...you better give us something really special or we're out...and oh, we are proceeding as if you won't.'

 

[Dodgersrf]

I think you are losing what the Chargers are saying. They aren't looking for sympathy from anyone. They are setting the groundwork for bowing out of San Diego. It's as simple as that...they are telling San Diego, 'hey, we've played this game with you for 14 years...you better give us something really special or we're out...and oh, we are proceeding as if you won't.'

Sounds eerily familiar.

 

[Sum1]

Sounds eerily familiar.

Doesn't it?

 

[Boffo97]

I think you are losing what the Chargers are saying. They aren't looking for sympathy from anyone. They are setting the groundwork for bowing out of San Diego. It's as simple as that...they are telling San Diego, 'hey, we've played this game with you for 14 years...you better give us something really special or we're out...and oh, we are proceeding as if you won't.'

I don't think I lost anything or that's what they're saying. I think they're trying to set themselves up to get some kind of payoff from whoever moves to L.A. (although they are keeping the option open for themselves of course) but aren't going to get one because the argument is kind of silly and more than a little pathetic.

Because it doesn't really make the potential of leaving San Diego any greater. It's just hubris by Spanos.

 

[bluecoconuts]

I think you are losing what the Chargers are saying. They aren't looking for sympathy from anyone. They are setting the groundwork for bowing out of San Diego. It's as simple as that...they are telling San Diego, 'hey, we've played this game with you for 14 years...you better give us something really special or we're out...and oh, we are proceeding as if you won't.'

The stuff about not wanting teams who left the market (Rams, Raiders) to return is what stood out at me, that's where it seemed to get into setting themselves up for trying to block a move to keep the market open, or as Boffo said to get a payoff for the Rams moving.

 

[BuiltRamTough]

Screw the owners. They make tons of money. Why should the public pay for the stadium? My mom and sister don't give a shit about sports, why should they pay for a stadium? IMO the owner should pay 80% of the stadium cost and the rest should come from PSLs and maybe 100 mill from the taxes or bonds.

 

[Loyal]

I want to say a word or two....At the "other" site, I have argued what I thought will happen with the Rams in 2016. I tried to use the facts that are there, and connected the dots. Some of you visit the other site as well.....I just wanted to apologize for getting in arguments that I thought were logical, trying to exclude passion, and it rarely worked. Of course, there is a lot of passion on all sides..and the other part that I regret, is that some of those that agreed with me were those I'd never invite to my house......My honest opinions, were co-opted by trolls, to hurt others...I'm not cool with that......
Anyway, how 'bout them Rams!?

 

[Boffo97]

Screw the owners. They make tons of money. Why should the public pay for the stadium? My mom and sister don't give a crap about sports, why should they pay for a stadium? IMO the owner should pay 80% of the stadium cost and the rest should come from PSLs and maybe 100 mill from the taxes or bonds.

That's a very valid stance, and a number of people agree with you.

The problem is that this is a stance that's going to inevitably lead to not having a team, no matter which city you are. There's only so many teams looking to move and except in cases where the owner wants to build his own place, if you don't build the stadium, someone else will.

 

[BuiltRamTough]

I want to say a word or two....At the "other" site, I have argued what I thought will happen with the Rams in 2016. I tried to use the facts that are there, and connected the dots. Some of you visit the other site as well.....I just wanted to apologize for getting in arguments that I thought were logical, trying to exclude passion, and it rarely worked. Of course, there

I want to say a word or two....At the "other" site, I have argued what I thought will happen with the Rams in 2016. I tried to use the facts that are there, and connected the dots. Some of you visit the other site as well.....I just wanted to apologize for getting in arguments that I thought were logical, trying to exclude passion, and it rarely worked. Of course, there is a lot of passion on all sides..and the other part that I regret, is that some of those that agreed with me were those I'd never invite to my house......My honest opinions, were co-opted by trolls, to hurt others...I'm not cool with that......
Anyway, how 'bout them Rams!?

This specific thread is about STL fans vs LA fans. Whichever one wins gets the Rams. Bring your A game sir.

 

[Boffo97]

This specific thread is about STL fans vs LA fans. Whichever one wins gets the Rams. Bring your A game sir.

L.A. has hotter women.

If you are an offended St. Louisan and wish to prove otherwise, feel free to post pictures of St. Louis women.

 

[bluecoconuts]

L.A. has hotter women.

If you are an offended St. Louisan and wish to prove otherwise, feel free to post pictures of St. Louis women.

I took my girlfriend out of St Louis, but she has a CA ID now, so they can't claim her anymore.

 

[Prime Time]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...s-been-generous-with-political-contributions/

Company that wants to build L.A. stadium has been generous with political contributions
Posted by Mike Florio on February 16, 2015

As Inglewood tries to build a new NFL stadium, the company that wants to develop the stadium has been active when it comes to ensuring that politicians inclined to support the project remain in office.

Via the Associated Press, Hollywood Park Land Co. has made $118,500 in campaign contributionsto Inglewood Mayor James Butts and two members of city council. The donations came during four different campaigns, dating back to 2006.

It’s a common, and entirely legal, chicken-and-egg reality of politics. Whether the donations flow to politicians already inclined to act a certain way or whether the donations induce the agenda, a democratic society contains an inherent underbelly of mutual back scratching. No successful politician is immune to that reality.

For Mayor Butts, it’s easy to justify the stadium as being in the best interests of the city over which he presides. Since he believes that, it’s also in the best interests of the stadium supporters to keep him in place.

If a similar dynamic had played out over the past few years in Missouri generally or St. Louis specifically, Rams owner Stan Kroenke possibly wouldn’t be tempted to move his team to a place that has the necessary political landscape to facilitate the construction of a state-of-the-art stadium.

 

[blue4]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...s-been-generous-with-political-contributions/

Company that wants to build L.A. stadium has been generous with political contributions
Posted by Mike Florio on February 16, 2015

As Inglewood tries to build a new NFL stadium, the company that wants to develop the stadium has been active when it comes to ensuring that politicians inclined to support the project remain in office.

Via the Associated Press, Hollywood Park Land Co. has made $118,500 in campaign contributionsto Inglewood Mayor James Butts and two members of city council. The donations came during four different campaigns, dating back to 2006.

It’s a common, and entirely legal, chicken-and-egg reality of politics. Whether the donations flow to politicians already inclined to act a certain way or whether the donations induce the agenda, a democratic society contains an inherent underbelly of mutual back scratching. No successful politician is immune to that reality.

For Mayor Butts, it’s easy to justify the stadium as being in the best interests of the city over which he presides. Since he believes that, it’s also in the best interests of the stadium supporters to keep him in place.

If a similar dynamic had played out over the past few years in Missouri generally or St. Louis specifically, Rams owner Stan Kroenke possibly wouldn’t be tempted to move his team to a place that has the necessary political landscape to facilitate the construction of a state-of-the-art stadium.

That last paragraph is the biggest pile of shit Florio has written in a while.

 

[RamFan503]

This specific thread is about STL fans vs LA fans. Whichever one wins gets the Rams. Bring your A game sir.

Actually, this thread is specifically NOT about St Louis fans vs. LA fans. But bring your A game nonetheless.

 

[RamBill]

Could the Rams and Raiders trade franchises? Bernie Miklasz tells The Fast Lane.

Listen to Bernie Talk Franchise Trade

 

[Goose]

Are the Chargers working with AEG to stop Kroenke?
February 16, 2015 1:43 PM

There was plenty of news breaking during The Fred Roggin Show on Monday, with the city of San Diego publicly battling with the San Diego Chargers leadership and the L.A. Times reporting a backroom connection between the Inglewood city officials and stadium developers.

Fred Roggin reads between the lines, and he thinks that AEG, who has been quiet about their Farmer’s Field project in recent months, may be forming a partnership with the Chargers while slowing down Stan Kroenke and the Rams.

The Chargers were in talks with AEG years ago. That’s how this whole thing started! Spanos and Phil Anschutz couldn’t come to an agreement on the evaluation of the team, because I still believe and maintain that Phil Anschutz is not going to spend close to $2 billion dollars on a stadium and get nothing out of it. That’s lunacy!

I think the deal here is that AEG and the Chargers are talking, and someone wants to slow [the Inglewood stadium project] down to give those two a chance to figure this out, and dig first. Think about this: what if tomorrow there was an announcement that AEG had acquired part of the Chargers or was in the ownership group of the Chargers? What would happen? You’d see bulldozers moving down Figueroa right now, which would take [Stan Kroenke’s Inglewood stadium project] out of the mix.

So, whoever digs first, wins. That’s really what this comes down to.

http://kfwbam.com/2015/02/16/are-the-chargers-working-with-aeg-to-stop-kroenke/#.VOLJYiP29mo.twitter

 

[Dxmissile]

http://www.chargers.com/news/2015/02/16/chargers-remarks-mayors-stadium-task-force

Looks like the Chargers are ready to bolt.

There situation sounds a lot more stringent then the one we currently face ourselves in. The owner of the Chargers from that letter will not let Stan simply walk in LA he will block the move if it were ever to happen. One thing that stuck out to me was the mention of 14 yrs. They kept ramming that fact home. While some say we waited too late, but the Chargers has been doing this for 14 yrs. Under the NFL guidelines Roger should give the chargers the ok to move before the Rams.

 

[rhinobean]

There situation sounds a lot more stringent then the one we currently face ourselves in. The owner of the Chargers from that letter will not let Stan simply walk in LA he will block the move if it were ever to happen. One thing that stuck out to me was the mention of 14 yrs. They kept ramming that fact home. While some say we waited too late, but the Chargers has been doing this for 14 yrs. Under the NFL guidelines Roger should give the chargers the ok to move before the Rams.

Would have made sense for Spanos to get with AEG years ago about moving the team to LA! Talk about exhausting the options for getting a stadium!

 

[bluecoconuts]

There situation sounds a lot more stringent then the one we currently face ourselves in. The owner of the Chargers from that letter will not let Stan simply walk in LA he will block the move if it were ever to happen. One thing that stuck out to me was the mention of 14 yrs. They kept ramming that fact home. While some say we waited too late, but the Chargers has been doing this for 14 yrs. Under the NFL guidelines Roger should give the chargers the ok to move before the Rams.

He'll try, but given the fact that he's never really been serious about moving, I doubt the NFL is going to let him just keep the market open.

Would have made sense for Spanos to get with AEG years ago about moving the team to LA! Talk about exhausting the options for getting a stadium!

He'll have to give up a portion of his team, AEG isn't building it for shits and giggles. That's why nobody has agreed to it as of late.

 

[blue4]

The Chargers got 20 years of access into a market they had no right to. I'm not going to have sympathy if they lose that access. And if they are fucked without this access to a market outside their own, it's their own fault.

That said, it's all but certain L.A. won't have a team next year. In addition to Goodell's proclamation that no would move there this year, the deadline for filing for relocation passed yesterday. The only way left for a move to happen is an owner going rogue with a midnight move, and I don't see Stan doing that until and unless it seems he's not going to get what he wants through the process. And the Raiders and Chargers really CAN'T do that as they would have no long term plans for a place to play.

First we say that since its a business Stan can do whatever he wants. Now we're talking about another business having no right to expand his business into vacant territory or to protect that newly won business from someone coming into the market. Which is it? Is the NFL just businesses, or is it a special franchise with rules that must be followed by all, even to a perceived detriment? Cause it seems to me your argument changes depending on the team.