New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Take this for what it's worth.

FWIW, 1360am just said SF chronicle reporting Raiders made deal with Oakland to give Raiders land, pay off colloseum debt, so they can build stadium.
 
MrMotes said:
You can go by words or you can go by actions.

Kroenke is the only NFL owner who has bought land and is currently building a stadium in Los Angeles. And i think you can make a pretty good case that Kroenke is the only one who's not talking because he's the only one who's not bluffing.

But only time will tell. We shall see...
Click to expand...

To be sure, Kroenke has bought land at Hollywood park (along with other developers.) And that land is actively being prepared for development. However, there is no stadium being built at this time at Hollywood Park. Actual construction on the stadium would not be started until December.

The development at Hollywood Park includes a renovated Hollywood Park casino, shopping center,300-room hotel, office space, parks, 2,995 residences (mostly single-family houses and townhouses), and two lakes. Several new streets will also need to be built across the 238-acre site. While a stadium for the project would be nice, it is not required for the project.
http://la.curbed.com/archives/2013/05/massive_hollywood_park_redevelopment_finally_beginning.php
 
Oakland, Raiders Close To Signing Deal To Build New Stadium

OAKLAND (CBSLA.com) — Rumors of the Oakland Raiders coming back to Los Angeles could soon be laid to rest.

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, Oakland has a deal in place for a new stadium for Mark Davis’ Raiders.

Oakland would give the team free land upon which to build a stadium and would pay off the $120 million dollars owed toward their current stadium, O. Co Coliseum.

“I expect it to be executed soon,” said Zach Wasserman, an attorney for Coliseum City.

If the stadium is built, it will be worth $900 million to $1.2 billion.

The Raiders’ lease at the Oakland coliseum expires after this season, at which point the team can move wherever they find the best deal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LosAngelesRams
Im telling you when push comes to shove these city's get a deal done. Look at the Colts,Vikings,Falcons, and now STL. SD and Oak will follow.
 
ZigZagRam said:
Exactly. I don't see Kroenke taking the risk. That's not the way he does things.

Just like this whole situation, he doesn't set himself up for the risk of failure. No matter what happens here, he wins.

Lose in court to the NFL. That's a huge loss.
Click to expand...
Stan spent 10 years hashing out details of the split between he and one of his former business partners. In the mean time, he went about business. You don't think he could do that with his team? This may not be a guy that generally looks for a fight and it is true that he tries to make his business dealings as clean and straight forward as possible. But he isn't exactly one to shy away from a fight.

I don't know who would win between the NFL and Stan. The NFL seems to be trying to prevent that scenario. The big question about the whole lawsuit angle is, would the NFL want to risk a lawsuit that if you extrapolated the $2.2 Billion dollar threat pushed by Georgia and Shaw, how many billions do you think a case by Stan would be pushing for. Do the other owners have the stomach for that kind of high stakes poker?
 
ChrisW said:
What I want is for Stan to put up half as much as he would in LA, with the Taxpayer money in STL to get a retractable roof stadium built in the Lou. How great would it be if we had an owner that wanted to invest in the history and future of the franchise.
Click to expand...
On a building he wouldn't own? Sorry man but good luck on that one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rhinobean
MrMotes said:
You can go by words or you can go by actions.

Kroenke is the only NFL owner who has bought land and is currently building a stadium in Los Angeles. And i think you can make a pretty good case that Kroenke is the only one who's not talking because he's the only one who's not bluffing.

But only time will tell. We shall see...
Click to expand...

Certainly one can take that as an indicator of what they believe or they can take the absence of verbal clear intent AS Kroenke wanting to give the St. Louis market as many opportunities as he can afford to see that he doesn't get shafted out of the opportunity .

I would also say this Kroenke would be a huge slimeball if he put this city through it's paces in the way they are with no intent to reward the efforts of Peacock and company. It's just not in me to hold that low an opinion of the guy who was the main proponent and driving force behind the Rams actually moving to St.L.

Upon a little further analysis of the man's possible motives is THAT his main line of business is developing properties around centers of activity and he (if NFL bylaws allow) may be intending to be a landlord to other teams with a venue he could rent to promoters of fights concerts and the like.

While actions do speak louder than words , they aren't as explicit and are subject to interpretation
 
  • Like
Reactions: rhinobean
BuiltRamTough said:
Oakland, Raiders Close To Signing Deal To Build New Stadium

OAKLAND (CBSLA.com) — Rumors of the Oakland Raiders coming back to Los Angeles could soon be laid to rest.

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, Oakland has a deal in place for a new stadium for Mark Davis’ Raiders.

Oakland would give the team free land upon which to build a stadium and would pay off the $120 million dollars owed toward their current stadium, O. Co Coliseum.

“I expect it to be executed soon,” said Zach Wasserman, an attorney for Coliseum City.

If the stadium is built, it will be worth $900 million to $1.2 billion.

The Raiders’ lease at the Oakland coliseum expires after this season, at which point the team can move wherever they find the best deal.
Click to expand...
Oh wait this story is from last year lol my bad
 
  • Like
Reactions: LosAngelesRams
MrMotes said:
You can go by words or you can go by actions.

Kroenke is the only NFL owner who has bought land and is currently building a stadium in Los Angeles. And i think you can make a pretty good case that Kroenke is the only one who's not talking because he's the only one who's not bluffing.

But only time will tell. We shall see...
Click to expand...
And this could be true as well. I'm just playing point - counter point here. People may not believe me but I really don't have a pony in the show. I moved from LA WAY before the Rams did. I hated Georgia and Shaw and later Zyggy. I like what Kroenke has been doing as far as the team goes. I'd rather they stay put but don't have the emotional attachment I'd have if I lived in either city.

The only thing I can say about why it doesn't mean a move with what Kroenke has done is that he is probably the only owner in the league that could take that property and do something else with it that was hugely profitable. If any other owner bought the land, I'd have to think it was ONLY for a stadium for his team. But development is what Stan does. So there is every possibility that the stadium angle is a sideshow to rattle the other side and force action. I would say that it has indeed forced action and got things moving. Some disagree with that and that's fine. But I just think that Stan had no intention of sitting there ten years later trying to get a new stadium in St Louis. Instead, he is forcing the action to move at his pace.

I may be dead wrong. Nah. THAT never happens.:D
 
  • Like
Reactions: rhinobean
tonyl711 said:
your last take is what im posting about. I wouldn't expect him to say anything else but to focus on the Rams, if he said hey if the Rams move we will bring another team there, he would create nervous fans in a few fan bases.
Click to expand...
Not only that. Do we think the NFL could force another team to move? Sounds like a promise he might not be able to keep.
 
RamFan503 said:
The list is long and varied. So does San Antonio become the new bargaining chip if LA gets filled?
Click to expand...

Reports (or maybe just rumors) are starting up about stadiums getting done in Oakland & SD. If the Rams become the 'only' team in L.A., I would bet the NFL will use the vacant "2nd Team" slot as on going leverage for other stadiums to get built.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BuiltRamTough
RAMbler said:
Reports (or maybe just rumors) are starting up about stadiums getting done in Oakland & SD. If the Rams become the 'only' team in L.A., I would bet the NFL will use the vacant "2nd Team" slot as on going leverage for other stadiums to get built.
Click to expand...

The NFL gets to decide who the team is per the G-4 resolution. That's why you always hear about them controlling the market.
 
RAMbler said:
Reports (or maybe just rumors) are starting up about stadiums getting done in Oakland & SD. If the Rams become the 'only' team in L.A., I would bet the NFL will use the vacant "2nd Team" slot as on going leverage for other stadiums to get built.
Click to expand...

San Diego may be viable, but I'm not so sure about Oakland, they're in a tougher situation economically. The question is how much of the Chargers bottom line is hurt by the Rams AND the Raiders moving to LA? Spanos is correct in worrying about his cash flow would take a hit, but I'm not sure that splitting the city with either of the two teams would be good for him, he's likely playing second fiddle to them both. Obviously being a tenant vs co-owner hurts a little more as well, I'm not sure how much Kroenke is willing to negotiate there, but if Spanos were to pitch in, it could help, if they were the teams to split. The Chargers best move for their overall dollar is likely a split with the Rams in LA, or Rams in LA and them in SD, and the Raiders in St Louis.

I heard/read (not sure which one, I don't remember) recently that the Raiders wouldn't mind a rebranding, which a move to LA doesn't help that. Not sure if St Louis even helps that to be honest, they may be stuck with the image.

Either way, I think SD can probably make something happen, if Spanos really does want to stay (similar to Kroenke), but I'm not sure about Oakland. Their best option is probably what St Louis has, assuming Rams leave. Cheapest for them, but gives them a good base of fans to grow, likely gives them the most profits.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BuiltRamTough
BuiltRamTough said:
Oh wait this story is from last year lol my bad
Click to expand...
Ha! I was going to ask what Davis intended to use for money to build the stadium. The land would be great and all but he'd still need to build the stadium.
 
One minor point about the G4 loan and Kroenke's responsibilities in paying it back. I keep seeing people add the amount of the loan to the total amount that he is responsible for paying. That seems a bit misleading, as the loan can actually be paid back with monies from that would normally be going back to the NFL as revenue sharing. For example, see the following regarding the Falcons new stadium and the G4 loan:

http://newstadium.atlantafalcons.com/funding2/g-4-stadium-financing/

In order to get that $200 million in G4 funding, the owner has to contribute at least that much towards the stadium. Anyway, just fyi...
 
jschmitt said:
One minor point about the G4 loan and Kroenke's responsibilities in paying it back. I keep seeing people add the amount of the loan to the total amount that he is responsible for paying. That seems a bit misleading, as the loan can actually be paid back with monies from that would normally be going back to the NFL as revenue sharing. For example, see the following regarding the Falcons new stadium and the G4 loan:

http://newstadium.atlantafalcons.com/funding2/g-4-stadium-financing/

In order to get that $200 million in G4 funding, the owner has to contribute at least that much towards the stadium. Anyway, just fyi...
Click to expand...

Its still 400M from his pocket. Granted it's less than 1.8B or whatever the LA one will, but he won't own it, own naming rights, nothing, so that makes it far less tantalizing.
 
ChrisW said:
The NFL gets to decide who the team is per the G-4 resolution. That's why you always hear about them controlling the market.
Click to expand...
In reading the G-4 it seems that the NFL has a say on who the second team is. Again - just weird shit in those bylaws.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChrisW
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back