Rams may be having problems with their tenants

[Loyal]

This thread has me laughing out loud at he crazy things people are saying.




For sure a bad fit. But if the Raiders would have gone to LA it would be worse because Kroenke's stadium would be the Raiders home and the Raiders would have been more popular than the Rams among fans.



You could be right. But whee do the Chargers go? Back to SD? To Vegas?



Spanos is making millions upon millions. Do you think he gives a fuck what anyone thinks? The family has been renting a stadium for the team forever. So what does your post even mean?



OK..........so what are these "hardline" negotiating tactics you are talking about?

I'm curious.




Kroenke is one of the most hated sports franchise owners on the planet.

Way more people hate Kroenke than Spanos.

Way more people hate Modell than Spanos.

More people hate plenty of other owners than Spanos.

Not everyone hates Spanos. Most people don't really give a shit.

He's hated in SD, rightfully so, but on the hate meter there are owners that are ahead of him for sure.



WTF I read that a few times and it still makes no sense.

LOL..........translate for me please.......someone, anyone.



Yes, exactly.

And this is true with A LOT of sports franchise owners. None of them care because they own the team and are making millions upon millions of dollars. At some point it will have to change, but when that is I have no idea.

We could easily name dozens of owners across the 4 biggest sports leagues that fan bases hate.

It's because they fuck people over for money and just don't care about the fans.



Lots you have wrong here. Everything actually.

The Chargers, like EVERY single NFL team turn a profit of MILLIONS of dollars from shared revenue. And they make money from other revenue streams. They are FAR from bleeding money.

The relocation fee is not a single bill paid on demand. It's split up over ten years and is money taken from the shared revenue by the NFL then split up. So there isn't technically "out of pocket" cost. It's just taken from the giant mountain of money the Chargers make every year for the next ten years. Same with Kroenke. His revenues from the shared dollars will pay for the relocation fee the same as the Chargers.

And..........the NFL has no "note" to call in. And they cannot repo the franchise and auction it off. And Kroenke has NOTHING to do with anything between the NFL and the Chargers. So how would he be involved in "calling in the note" which doesn't exist in the first place?

As far as Spanos having what's "left after the wolves are done feasting" you're wrong. Spanos owns the team. If it is sold he gets the money. The new owner will be the one responsible for the relocation fee, and I already spelled out how that is "paid".

Literally everything that you just said is completely wrong.
..................................................................................................................................
I have no idea why it bothers so many people that the Chargers are in LA, and will be playing in the same stadium. Why does anyone care about this? And why so much hatred?

It has zero effect on the Rams. The NFL brokered the deal and Kroenke agreed to it as fast as he could to get the move approved. Blaming Spanos here is strange because all three parties signed off on this and then 30 of the 32 owners voted to approve of both teams moving.

1. Yes I did say “everyone” hates Spanos and the Chargers, along with San Diego fan base. Since I do ‘t especially care what the feelings/opinion of other fan bases are about Spanos, I was speaking more for the Rams fan base and the fan base in San Diego. Seems that I am wrong because you and coconut want to share our stadium with the Chargers.
2. In the American football world, I don’t see any proof that Kroenke is more hated than Spanos. Ex St Louis Ram fans and Ex San Diego Charger fans, like you said, have reason to hate the team owners. I don’t think any other American football fans care about either that much. Notice that Icould care less about UK soccer fans or fans of the Nuggets think about anything. If want to include them in a football owners discussion, then knock yourself out.
3. Why do we hate Spanos and hate sharing the Rams stadium with another NFL franchise?
* I hated sharing the Los Angeles metro with the Raiders in the 1980’s (damned interlopers). So if I hated the Raiders for invading LARams territory (against NFL direction) and winning a Super Bowl here, why wouldn’t I hate the Chargers twice as much for horning in on the Rams place? Remember, Spanos couldn’t and can’t afford To build his own stadium, and initially tried to block any teams from moving into “their area.” When the NFL didn’ buy that BS, Spanos and Bowl Cut tried to team up on a stadium in Carson, and failed. Then Kroenke was forced to take on a team at the new place, to gain the NFL’s blessing to move home.

Now he can’t afford it? Screw him to death, IMO.

 

[coconut]

The Rams quickly became the “clippers” when the Raiders were in LA.
Having revenue 17 weeks a year could help Kronk....not that he needs it....and the NFL (I’m guessing) with selling TV ad revenue in the future.
As for the Rams it would have no impact except perhaps fewer ticket sales.
LA can support one NFL team well.
It has been this way and will be this way.

Two teams in LA was the deal that was agreed to. Winning fills seats.

 

[Mister Sin]

I had an evil thought that I won't put up, but yeah...hehehehehe....

I’m with you! Lol

 

[Loyal]

Well, I absolutely love the chargers for taking the spot the Raiders would have fit into. No mater how well the Rams play, the Raiders would have made this a real fight for LA. I think the owners new that. That is why they allowed the Chargers to move. Now it is to late for the Raiders to move here no mater what happens to the Chargers. So thank you Chargers. I will always be grateful.

I like them AFTER they move to Mexico City!

 

[Loyal]

Two teams in LA was the deal that was agreed to. Winning fills seats.

The “deal” also included an owner who isn’t a deadbeat. We are fans and are not committed to what NFL and it’s owners decide,so we can hope the Chargers fail and move away. I loathe having to share an NFL stadium with another team...Let em do that crap in Jersey if they want!

 

[coconut]

Seems that I am wrong because you and coconut want to share our stadium with the Chargers.

I don't care if the stadium is shared. Makes zero difference to me.

 

[Loyal]

I don't care if the stadium is shared. Makes zero difference to me.

We are extremely different on this issue.

 

[coconut]

The “deal” also included an owner who isn’t a deadbeat. We are fans and are not committed to what NFL and it’s owners decide,so we can hope the Chargers fail and move away. I loathe having to share an NFL stadium with another team...Let em do that crap in Jersey if they want!

Well the Chargers rent is $1 per year so somehow it will be paid.

 

[pmil66]

That is some sloppy supposition right there. The Rams WANT the Charger there.........meaning Kroenke. He stands to make a shit ton of money off of parking and concessions.

Just because YOU don't like the Chargers being in the stadium doesn't mean Kroenke doesn't want them there.
[/QUOTE]

Spanos was partner with Davis, not Stan in the beginning. This was a hastily arranged agreement between the 2. Stan wanted to go alone, had to agree to take a tenant.

Could care less about the Rams sharing a stadium with the Chargers, or anyone. Frankly, hope Stan goes broke and loses his fortune on the venture.

 

[Loyal]

Well the Chargers rent is $1 per year so somehow it will be paid.

Well, I can take solace that it will be packed with a majority of other teams fans and still have a half empty stadium!

 

[Loyal]

That is some sloppy supposition right there. The Rams WANT the Charger there.........meaning Kroenke. He stands to make a shit ton of money off of parking and concessions.

Just because YOU don't like the Chargers being in the stadium doesn't mean Kroenke doesn't want them there.

Spanos was partner with Davis, not Stan in the beginning. This was a hastily arranged agreement between the 2. Stan wanted to go alone, had to agree to take a tenant.

Could care less about the Rams sharing a stadium with the Chargers, or anyone. Frankly, hope Stan goes broke and loses his fortune on the venture.
[/QUOTE]
Sounds like a poll is in order..

 

[LesBaker]

The wiki article is just a generic overall statement It even states it's an agreement "In Principle". I don't think I've seen any detailed, contractual language with regards to how SSL's are valued or to be determined. I seriously doubt though that there's an agreement saying "Hey, it's OK if your SSL's are going for 25% of what our SSL's are. That's exactly where we stand right now. My seats have a SSL price tag of $4,000 each. The same EXACT seats for the Bolts are $1000, and that's when I researched them over a year ago.

There really isn't a lot of info on the financial agreements out there. Not that I care much about it.

I think PSL's can fluctuate can't they?

The Rams quickly became the “clippers” when the Raiders were in LA.
Having revenue 17 weeks a year could help Kronk....not that he needs it....and the NFL (I’m guessing) with selling TV ad revenue in the future.
As for the Rams it would have no impact except perhaps fewer ticket sales.
LA can support one NFL team well.
It has been this way and will be this way.

Because fans support teams that win more than they support teams that lose. The Cliipers started winning and guess what..........they sold out. The Lakers started losing and missing the playoffs and guess what..........attendance at Lakers games dipped even though the NBA was breaking records for attendance overall.

CLE is a perfect example. Always rated #1 or #2 overall fanbase. Yet when they hit the recent doldrums there were empty seats all over the place. It costs a lot of money and many fans won't pony up the dollars if the team is bad.

I'll use the Cavaliers as an example too. I remember when they were drawing less than 10,00 fans to the games. The team was terrible. Along comes LeBron James and you couldn't get a ticket.

As far as LA supporting one team well we shall see. Last year they had a SB run and we all saw lots of opposing fans and some empty seats.

It's going to take time. 21 years out of the market means that about half of the people in LA that like football pretty much grew up without the Rams. If you figure that a person starts becoming a fan at age 8-10 that means that people in LA around 30 years old didn't grow up with the team there. Most people are from another area also.

Both of these teams will take time to develop a loyal fan base. And attendance will hinge on winning.

There is a lot of work to do.

Two teams in LA was the deal that was agreed to. Winning fills seats.

Yes it does.

 

[Merlin]

Kroenke is one of the most hated sports franchise owners on the planet.

Way more people hate Kroenke than Spanos.

The problem is nobody loves Spanos. I don't know anyone who likes him, even among a ton of buds I have in San Dog some of whom still follow the team.

I'm guessing Kroenke is beloved now by most of the owners who include the richest and most powerful (to include Jerry Jones who called him a God send or somesuch and rightly so after he solved 20 years of incompetence in solving the stadium issue in LA). I find it instructive that as amazing as Stan's stadium plan was that the owners actually had to duke it out over the plans all because of Spanos the dip$hit thinking LA was his and him calling in favors from his family's connections in the league. He basically was a charity case to slide into LA when in fact it should have been the Raiders, since both the Rams & Raiders have a history in the area but the Chargers' ownership of LA was all in Spanos' mind.

Kroenke is also a power player in LA now. He's like a damn redevelopment messiah for what he's done and that feeling is only going to grow as that area brings LA into the limelight with not only a top product on the field but the stadium, NFL offices, etc.

Spanos just hasn't done a damn thing but get in the way of the NFL's solution in LA. For 20 years he sat on his @$$ content to think LA was his vice doing something about it but then he makes his $#!TTY move when Stan puts a real solution together? I mean that's just not good for the league. IMO the sooner the NFL gets rid of owners like him, who live off their team, the better for the entire league. And oh btw... Georgia was that type of owner. So those of us who go way back as fans (which is most of this board) know very well what it's like to root for a team run by that setup.

I do recall reading that Spanos was the one that turned Stan on to the property in Inglewood. Not sure how true that is but even if it is it demonstrates he didn't have the money or wherewithal to do a damn thing about it. So for me at least the day Spanos and his family are out of the league will be a good one. I eagerly await the fallout from all this and hope Stan squeezes him for every MFing penny.

 

[Akrasian]

I don't care if the stadium is shared. Makes zero difference to me.

The turf will be harder to maintain with a game every week there. I would prefer the Rams be alone there for that reason alone. Especially during the playoffs, when there could be a Saturday and a Sunday game.

In terms of Kroenke making more money from parking, etc if the Chargers play there, that is minor compared to the extra money by having the fan base to himself, and no worries about the other team doing well and making it tougher to sell full price season tickets for the Rams.

 

[coconut]

We are extremely different on this issue.

Thats fine. Now I'm trying to understand how someone could be so against the sharing of a stadium. Fearsome4 worries about the Rams becoming the NFL version of the Clippers. Fielding a good team cures that. So I put my two brain cells together to find some justification for being stadium stingy. Then it came to me, in my left brain cell aka my remaining brain cell that this comes down to the seat itself. Body odor of Bolts fans must be intense and quite persistent? Even after a week? Can't think of more since I'm easily distracted.

View: https://youtu.be/CLuLSDsmjdE

 

[coconut]

The turf will be harder to maintain with a game every week there. I would prefer the Rams be alone there for that reason alone. Especially during the playoffs, when there could be a Saturday and a Sunday game.

Not an issue. Rams can do what AZ does with their turf on wheels. Rams play on turf and Bolts play on the concrete floor. (You're welcome, Stan.)

 

[Loyal]

@pmil66 ...Not really...Kroenke wanted into the LA market no matter what. Stan is going to make money for other activities who also have to pay for parking on the Sundays in which we don’t play. This will be a prime venue in LA. Stan smiled and did the happy NFL dance when the deal was made, he doesn’t need broke assed Spanos to make money there.

There is little chance Stan goes broke

 

[LesBaker]

@pmil66 ...Not really...Kroenke wanted into the LA market no matter what. Stan is going to make money for other activities who also have to pay for parking on the Sundays in which we don’t play. This will be a prime venue in LA. Stan smiled and did the happy NFL dance when the deal was made, he doesn’t need broke assed Spanos to make money there.

There is little chance Stan goes broke

The venue in this case will make him more money than Spanos paying $1 a year will. Revenues from concerts and other events and the parking and concessions they generate will be enormous.

Spanos is going to make Kroenke money when the Chargers play 10 games there. But it's a drop in the bucket for a venue like this.

Imagine how many concerts, college bowl games, festivals, expos and all the rest will be booked on that property. The venue could see upwards of 100 events a year outside of the Chargers games. It could generate tens of millions in profits, not total revenues, actual profits.

There is a reason a lot of pro sports franchise owners want to own the buildings. The cash generated is insane.

 

[XXXIVwin]

Les—

As far as my comment about the ‘whose house?’ chant being a part of ‘hardline negotiating tactics’, I was simply making a joke.

Most hated owners? Pretty hard to quantify. Ppl in Cleveland hate Modell, Baltimore hates Irsay, StL hates Kroenke, and SD hates Spanos. For obvious reasons.

Not sure ‘hate’ is really the right word for many of us regarding Spanos. Mostly, I am smfh because he is a complete buffoon. I followed the relocation drama pretty closely, and Spanos’ incompetence was staggering.

Yes, sharing a stadium with the Raiders would suck, I’d far prefer the Chargers to the Raiduhs. However, my first preference would be for the Rams to have LA all to themselves.

Lastly— yes, I do think Spanos “gives a fuck about what ppl think.” Yes, I think he agonized over the decision. Yes, I think he and his family developed deep roots in San Diego over decades, I think he would have “preferred” to stay there, and I think he feels guilty about ripping the hearts out from so many ppl in San Diego. But in the end, he chose love of money over his love of San Diego. He could have worked things out in San Diego if (a) he was competent and (b) he was willing to reduce his profit margin. But instead, he allowed the whole thing to fail so he could say to the league, “please bail me out and let me go to LA and piggyback on Stan’s success.”

 

[Mackeyser]

Oh please, Mac, do tell! Enquiring minds want to know!

Be poetic if St Louis got another LA team...