Some thoughts on Kroenke as an owner...

[Ram65]

Thats a nice thought, but it didn't really work before so why would it work now?

I appreciate the fans saying that LA is going to draw players and coaches but I have to ask..........why didn't it do that before?

Apples and Oranges. The Big A Vs New Stadium. Do I even have to explain?

I imagine you know Rams history. Georgia was not happy with the then (the late 70's) LA Coliseum's lack of NFL luxury suites and the revenue they bring. The Big A was a baseball venue and not a good place for football. I have been there a number of times. During these times Georgia cut payroll and lost players for pure financial reasons. Back in the day many Rams players became TV stars and were even in movies. Fred Dwyer, Rosie Greer, Merlin Olsen and even Roman Gabriel are a few. Maybe you don't remember but the Rams use to draw 100,000 for games in the LA Coliseum. Things are always evolving and changing. Some things were good and some bad for NFL football in LA. From my vantage point things are looking good for the future Rams in LA.

 

[OldSchool]

That is a run on sentence, where is your punctuation!!!

Under the speed bump.

 

[drasconis]

I've cited this many times before but what you said there is not actually correct. Going into the 2015 season there were 10 teams that were in danger of violating the CBA and paying heavy fines because they weren't spending at least 89% of the salary cap.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ending-union-nflpa-raiders-patriots/23522207/



If those teams by the end of 2016 don't correct that they have to pay the players union the difference as a fine that the union distributes as it wishes.

That is a incomplete view though. Those teams could be doing it as a 4 year strategy to have extra money at the end to spend on FA or reward young players they want to re-up. Of the teams "under" at that point most are high value teams. For instance the Rams are now the 3rd most valuable team but note that both the 1st and 2nd most valuable are on this list (Dal & Pats). I don't think anyone would say that most of those teams listed are cheap or poor organizations. Yes Oak and Jac may be small market cheaper organization (though one could argue that Jac is smart as they will have money come 2016 to pay the likes of Allen and Robinson or redue Bortles).

As was pointed out the Rams spent up to the cap so have no roll over, but for that they ended up under .500 and missed the playoffs again. They also have 16 FA this offseason and some rollover would have been nice (yes they have options to cut guys to get more money but it is always better to have additional options). The rams are also likely to have limited rollover for next year and the next round of young talent coming due.

The fact is with the NFL payroll set-up the Rams aren't really going to outspend anyone else on players, yes there may be a handful of "cheap teams" but most teams will end up spending similar amounts over a 4 year period. Those that are under may be so by plan, for instance worry of injury and needing tot pick up guys mid-season....other may be under due to a player they thought would be expensive being a bust or wash out. For instance one would think the Rams are already thinking about when Gurley or Donald hit the 3 yr mark and can be reworked longer term. But things can happen - career ending injury/off field issue/etc.

 

[OldSchool]

The fact is with the NFL payroll set-up the Rams aren't really going to outspend anyone else on players,

I never said they were going to outspend anybody on players, they'll spend to the cap though as they've proven.

yes there may be a handful of "cheap teams" but most teams will end up spending similar amounts over a 4 year period. Those that are under may be so by plan, for instance worry of injury and needing tot pick up guys mid-season....other may be under due to a player they thought would be expensive being a bust or wash out.

The point of that article and my comments is that not every team spends their cap. The Jaguars for instance were at 82.2% after 2 years, this past year was year 3 of the 4 year cycle and they spent 80.1% they actually went down. The cap for year 4, 2016, is going to be $154 million the Jags are going to have to go over that by $40 million to not pay the fines to the union.

I could care less about the Jaguars not being a fan but these rules of spending 89% of the cap were put in for a reason and I find it nice that my teams owner is spending the salary cap to at least try to put a winning product on the field.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Thats a nice thought, but it didn't really work before so why would it work now?

I appreciate the fans saying that LA is going to draw players and coaches but I have to ask..........why didn't it do that before?

I'm not convinced that LA alone is going to draw players, but it would probably help... That being said, travel was probably a big part of it before, it's a totally different experience.

 

[FrankenRam]

I've cited this many times before but what you said there is not actually correct. Going into the 2015 season there were 10 teams that were in danger of violating the CBA and paying heavy fines because they weren't spending at least 89% of the salary cap.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ending-union-nflpa-raiders-patriots/23522207/



If those teams by the end of 2016 don't correct that they have to pay the players union the difference as a fine that the union distributes as it wishes.

While that's true, what do you think is more likely to happen.....those teams will find a way to spend that money themselves, or they will pay the fine to the NFLPA. I sure wouldn't bet on the latter. Moot point. Kroenke gets no credit for the 'pay as you go' practice.

 

[FrankenRam]

Financially viable or not the Rams will be on the top of the destination list for many NFL players and coaches.

My how I love opinions stated as fact.

 

[OldSchool]

While that's true, what do you think is more likely to happen.....those teams will find a way to spend that money themselves, or they will pay the fine to the NFLPA. I sure wouldn't bet on the latter. Moot point. Kroenke gets no credit for the 'pay as you go' practice.

My how I love opinions stated as fact.

It is funny how some people cite opinion as fact. Are you certain Kroenke hasn't told Demoff the pay as you go method is how it should be done or is that your opinion?

As for the other teams I don't see how they can get away without paying the fine. By the numbers they're just too far behind. But that's just my opinion.

 

[Prime Time]

The idea that Stan Kroenke is cheap is well laughable. Isn't Jeff Fisher one of the highest paid coaches in the NFL at 7 million a year? By contrast, Ron Rivera gets paid between 4 to 5 million and Marvin Lewis at around 3.25 million. Check the list at the link below...

http://www.otherleague.com/contracts/nfl-head-coach-contracts-salaries/

I wonder how much Gregg Williams gets paid? I bet he's getting a hefty salary as well. That money is not from the salary cap but comes from the owner himself. If Kroenke was cheap then he would pay his staff accordingly. Then there's the matter of spending billions on a new, state-of-the-art stadium.

I get that some are unhappy with Stan Kroenke but there are legitimate criticisms that could be made of him. Being cheap is not one of them.

 

[drasconis]

As for the other teams I don't see how they can get away without paying the fine. By the numbers they're just too far behind. But that's just my opinion.

I won't go through every team on the list, but for example Jacksonville could smartly make up this ground fairly easy - as you point out they are close to 40mil behind, but that gives them a lot of rollover for 2016. They have $76mil in cap space to the Rams $32mil (not counting possible cuts that have not been made yet). This room would allow them to front load several contracts so they aren't strapped in the future. in 2016 they have 3 major players hitting the third year (Bortles/Hurns/Robinson) which means that all 3 can now be extended. They can do what the Rams did with Quinn where they give them large roster bonuses and lower pay so that the contract hit in the future is not bad, plus if they later decide to cut them it is less. For instance Quinn was a cap hit of 16.7mil last year while only being 11mil this year due to the roster bonus (which was 10mil). Both Hurns and Robinson could be extended say 3 years (so a 4 year contract including 2016) for say a total cost of 38mil a piece, using a big roster bonus of say 12 mil each and salary of 7 mil (just to be generic, though in likelihood it would start lower and escalate) each would be a cap hit of 19mil this year so figure about 35mil of that cap room just was used (their current deal would disappear, but they are low cost deals currently). They could do something similar for Bortles (QBs tend to be more expensive though) that reasonably could eat another $20 mil of cap space. Suddenly that cap room is down to say $26mil which likely gives them room for their own FA (they have 11) or to go after other FA (such as JJ or Tru).

I admit I may be generous or low on the deals for Hurns and Robinson, but they could put more money for FA. It makes them more able to pay higher for someone like JJ or Tru, frontload the deal so the player gets paid upfront (which they tend to like) and lower the future cost of the player.

Now let me be clear I am not saying they WILL do this, but they can do something like this and easily hit that cap requirement and not be in cap hell in the future. I am also not saying that the Rams have done anything wrong in how they approach spending under the system or with their players....I am just saying that a team could have planned to be able to approach the 4th year with lots of money to spend because they believed it put them in a better long term position (especially a younger team like the Rams or Jags).

I will also note that while there is a lot of talk of resigning Rams FA, no one is even talking about the possibility of extending Donald which the Rams could officially do (one would think at a pretty high cost though), but aren't likely to at this point with so many FA to deal with. The rollover would have been useful for such a thing, once again not saying Rams did it wrong just saying that but that their are different possible strategies to these things.

 

[RAGRam]

Stan cares about one thing, winning, I think we're all tremendously lucky to have him, and we're only going to go from strength to strength with him as owner, it wouldn't surprise me to see us with 2 Super Bowls in the next 5 years.

 

[tonyl711]

JT's tweets so much, so you can't go back far enough, but it's obvious that even if I posted pictures of him it wouldn't be enough.. I don't argue that Kroenke wasn't personally involved in the community, but I argue that he never went to any games, isn't invested, or that the Rams weren't involved. I don't think that Stan is some saint, but he's not the devil... He's just a guy, he goes to games for his teams, spends money, and makes a lot more.

not saying he is the devil, personally i cant stand the thought of the guy, but i do realize that he made a good bussiness decision, i just dont like the way he went about it, but no he wasnt at very many Rams home games, he was pretty much an absentee owner here.

 

[tonyl711]

Being in every game day thread but two, both road games I was at, there were tweets citing Stan was at the game.

sorry but show me

 

[OldSchool]

sorry but show me

Not worth my time because you will just call JT a liar. A lot of us know it's true, you just choose to ignore it.

 

[RamzFanz]

When he made his move to LA though, he never told St Louis to keep working, in fact they reportedly told the Task Force not to bother.

Not true. HE never said anything. Demoff encouraged the task force, came to meetings, and even offered advice on improvements.

Stan Kroenke said what he had to say in 2010 when he took over the Rams and then went silent. Every step from there on out appears to be to facilitate a move to LA. I'm not saying he's wrong for doing it, it's what business people do, I'm saying that is what he is and in no way could anyone say he is all about the Rams, their history, or even their future, as long as they make him more money.

I didn't say Kroenke never went to any games, you said he went to every one. I have no way of knowing except to say, he was rarely seen on TV and never on the big screen when I was there. It was noted in several articles that he was absent.

Regardless, and I wish to end with this, Kroenke is all about Kroenke, not the Rams. His history speaks for itself. Why people would attribute things to him like "he went to every Rams game" with no source, is a whitewash of who he is and what motivates him.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Not true. HE never said anything. Demoff encouraged the task force, came to meetings, and even offered advice on improvements.

Stan Kroenke said what he had to say in 2010 when he took over the Rams and then went silent. Every step from there on out appears to be to facilitate a move to LA. I'm not saying he's wrong for doing it, it's what business people do, I'm saying that is what he is and in no way could anyone say he is all about the Rams, their history, or even their future, as long as they make him more money.

I didn't say Kroenke never went to any games, you said he went to every one. I have no way of knowing except to say, he was rarely seen on TV and never on the big screen when I was there. It was noted in several articles that he was absent.

Regardless, and I wish to end with this, Kroenke is all about Kroenke, not the Rams. His history speaks for itself. Why people would attribute things to him like "he went to every Rams game" with no source, is a whitewash of who he is and what motivates him.

When the Rams proposal to relocate came out and everyone was scratching their heads at why Kroenke decided to blast St Louis, I heard a few different news outlets say that Kroenke was pissed at the task force because he told them that he had no interest in staying, and instead of backing off Peacock went and trashed talked him to his fellow owners... Peacock, like Iger, likely felt that he was closer than he actually was, hence why owners told Kroenke what Peacock told them, and why owners laughed at Iger after his presentation when he tried to throw in how much money he gave them.

I corrected myself in that I felt he went to most games, especially last year, you said he was never around. I posted tweets and photo's of him being around, that was proof enough. Him not being shoved onto the big screen doesn't mean anything, he probably told them not to given the situation at hand. Why put yourself on the screen so the stadium can boo you?

 

[RamFan503]

In the interest of moving on, I'm going to lock this thread. It seems this thread can really only be about pitting fans against each other and not about Rams FOOTBALL.

A personal note from this fan's perspective:

I don't want to squelch thought but at some point, we need to get beyond finger pointing. No one will ever truly know what went on behind closed doors or really - at any time in the negotiations between SK and the CVC. Saying Stan doesn't care about the Rams is pointless. Saying Stan had no other choice or attended or didn't attend games in my opinion is pointless as well. That is only my opinion. But where is this talk getting us?

Regardless, we as a staff have been trying to post threads and articles that talk football and in particular - OUR Rams. Though it is tough to not have the move intertwine with almost every article or thread, we are encouraging it. None of the members here at ROD had anything to do with this move, nor could we have done anything about it. We are fans of the Rams team.

And though it is the off season and there isn't a lot of football related things happening, talking about the whos and whys of the move is simply circular. No one wins.

Cheers and GO RAMS!!!