Well, that's simple. They pulled...Wonder how they would come up with this figure.
[The rest of Boffo97's message goes unheard as sounds of Prime Time beating Boffo with a truncheon ring out through the forum]
Well, that's simple. They pulled...Wonder how they would come up with this figure.
I would think it's mostly a matter of a franchise in L.A. being worth more than a franchise in St. Louis (through no fault at all of St. Louis or anyone there).I wonder who p'd in Kroenke cereal for him to dump on the STL fans like he seems to be doing? The deal in CA is a win for the city of Inglewood with no downside in the way of taxes for the residents! Quite different than what's going on in STL! I expect that he could get a sweetheart tax deal in MO if he wanted to build a stadium in MO! Guess he really is a douche!!
I would think it's mostly a matter of a franchise in L.A. being worth more than a franchise in St. Louis (through no fault at all of St. Louis or anyone there).
Wanting to increase the value of one's property really doesn't make one a douche.
You're probably right... just like L.A. fans usually won't think too highly of Georgia.IMO, that's it in a nutshell.
My (probably terribly whacky) idea is based largely on my recollection of events at the time Chip & Whatshername openly put the Rams on the market. For a period of time, SK gave no significant indication he was interested in being sole owner of the team. It wasn't until some time after Shad Khan came to the fore and seemed to be gaining some momentum as a potentially real player for purchasing the team that (almost) all of a sudden SK decided he wanted to own the team.
And I suspect that came about because 'his people' eventually brought a plan to him detailing how he could turn the team's purchase into the proverbial pot of gold at the end of the LA rainbow that he finally went 'Holy Sheeee-1t' and put his offer on the table.
Throw in building his own stadium on his own nickel....which could be rented out for Super Bowls, NCAA Playoff Championship games, possibly to a 2nd NFL team, and who knows how many other events, and I have little doubt he could become THE dominant owner in the NFL within 5 yr of moving the team to LA.
As a result, I've come to believe the plan has ALWAYS been to move to LA. And I also think that's at least part of the reason he's become, not 'Silent Stan', but much closer to 'Invisible Stan'......because he knew how he'd be viewed in STL if the plan came to light....because he was viewed as something of a hometown boy in STL that provided some degree of confidence he'd keep the team here (at least initially).
So technically, no....wanting to increase the value of one's property doesn't make one a douche. But to expect STL fans to see it any other way is unrealistic....assuming any part of my half-baked theory is remotely accurate.
Exactly.You're probably right... just like L.A. fans usually won't think too highly of Georgia.
You're probably right... just like L.A. fans usually won't think too highly of Georgia.
I'm thinking he's a douche for expecting STL to spend 700 million tax dollars to improve the dome but he can spend his own money on a stadium in LA! This after telling the folks in STL that he's an honorable man, a MO man and would keep the team in STL! It's not about the benjamins, it's about the bs told to the fans in STL when he took over ownership!I would think it's mostly a matter of a franchise in L.A. being worth more than a franchise in St. Louis (through no fault at all of St. Louis or anyone there).
Wanting to increase the value of one's property really doesn't make one a douche.
I'm sorry, but I disagree totally with this. Of course owners are trying to make money.Before I hear the stupid, stupid, stupid freaking argument of "it's just business" again let me say this too. PEOPLE DON'T BUY SPORTS TEAMS TO MAKE MONEY. They buy them because they have too much money.
I think to a point what User is saying is true though. These guys are all billionaires. To a point - yes they are in it to make money. But money I assume at that point becomes more of a prestige thing than really a desire to make the money itself. Where I differ is that there is really a huge difference between Stan and maybe 25 or 30 other owners when it comes down to it. They can talk like they respect the fans of the given city but in reality, if the rubber were ever to meet the road, they would play hard ball as well as they were able.I'm sorry, but I disagree totally with this. Of course owners are trying to make money.
The past 2 years the Cardinals played the Dodgers in the playoffs they couldn't even fill the freaking seats up until the 4th inning. Then even the die hard fans left after the 7th to beat traffic. I would say that team has some history there too
And when the Kings played the Blues two years in a row for the playoffs, Scotttrade Center failed to sellout. Luckily these things have nothing to do with football, and are essentially comparing apples to oranges.
I didn't like Georgia because she ran a great franchise into the ground.You're probably right... just like L.A. fans usually won't think too highly of Georgia.
Good thing it only took 2 Stanley Cups to 12 million people for things to start popping. I don't think we're that far behind in attendance to the Kings as it is, but I really don't care. The point is, it isn't about support to Stan. It isn't about the cities, or the fans. It's about him.
Kings have always had good numbers. I always felt its about Stan and his prestige and his net worth (but more so prestige), which is why discussing fan bases means nothing. There's no need to take shots at LA because you're upset that he may move, just as there's no need to take shots at St Louis if they decide to stay. Stan isn't going to be swayed by rallies and letters, if St Louis wants the Rams they need to up their proposal. If Stan is unwilling to accept anything other than them bending over the table again, then its more complicated. The offer made a few weeks ago made it too easy for him to say no.
As long as he gets to eat caviar out of one of Jerry Jones hookers ass crack in the penthouse he has above the stadium while the Superbowl is being played, as everyone is kissing his ass.
My recollection goes like this, Stan had a right of first refusal so he was waiting on offers from outside to set the market, and FWIW when you have THAT as a feature of a contract it costs something BK those can be transferable IOW sold to third parties.IMO, that's it in a nutshell.
My (probably terribly whacky) idea is based largely on my recollection of events at the time Chip & Whatshername openly put the Rams on the market. For a period of time, SK gave no significant indication he was interested in being sole owner of the team. It wasn't until some time after Shad Khan came to the fore and seemed to be gaining some momentum as a potentially real player for purchasing the team that (almost) all of a sudden SK decided he wanted to own the team.
.
In a way though, that's almost saying the same thing.I have to agree with user on the notion that people don't buy teams to make money. That's just a byproduct. People have sports teams because they love the sport, have inherited the team, or because of the exposure and prestige. And in this case, I don't think for a minute money is Stan's main goal. Again, that's just a byproduct. Stan's goal is to play with Jerry Jones and the other cool kids from New York and Chicago. He doesn't want to play with Cincinnati and the nerds from Cleveland or Jacksonville. He is looking to be the coolest hairpiece on the playground.