ttricamo wrote:Number of years since Cleveland has won a championship: 50. (Source: WSJ)
I don't get the idea that keeping this team be predicated upon their win/loss record. I want an NFL team! I want St Louis to be an NFL city! Their record is fourth or maybe fifth in line terms of why it's important to have an NFL city here.
I'm not saying there aren't some, but what would your 5 reasons be?
I don't think whether the Rams stay or go should be predicated on their record, but I don't blame fans for not being gung ho over the Rams and the NFL. NFL football has been TERRIBLE to St. Louis.
Oh, and in the middle of Cleveland's 50 year stretch without a championship, their team moved. (In reality anyways. The official record actually shows that Baltimore got a new franchise comprised of all of Cleveland's old players and staff, the Browns took a brief hiatus, and later re-entered the league.)
ttricamo wrote:Number of years since Cleveland has won a championship: 50. (Source: WSJ)
I don't get the idea that keeping this team be predicated upon their win/loss record. I want an NFL team! I want St Louis to be an NFL city! Their record is fourth or maybe fifth in line terms of why it's important to have an NFL city here.
It only recently came to my attention just how badly Indiana was swindled by the Colts when they got their new stadium a few years back (http://deadspin.com/getting-screwed-wit ... 1677274543). I suppose I always assumed it was a pretty fair public-private split because both sides often point to it as an example, and because Indianapolis has seen some renaissance. (Now, I assume it was the building itself that was being pointed to and not necessarily the deal).
Anyways, that got me digging to see whether Indianapolis had ever threatened a move to LA. The answer is no, publicly. They just let the fear of the open LA market and the rampant speculation that they were close to a stadium deal there fuel fear. I found this ESPN article from 2003, and it's amazing just how familiar it sounds.
I hope St. Louis doesn't cave in to that fear as much. Like I said before, I think a 33% split is fair. Maybe even 40% if the development plan is strong.
Apparently, we'll know more in the coming weeks. Kevin Demoff was on KMOX today and said that the task force has been looking at when to announce and believes it will be in the next few weeks.
Kroenke is a real piece of garbage, and that's fitting of the NFL. He hasn't engaged St. Louis negotiators on the stadium issue at all. The league has allowed him to violate their own rules for the past 4 seasons to buy the Rams in the first place, using a right of first refusal to interrupt a deal with Shad Khan who was committed to St. Louis.
He's refused to work on a new stadium deal in St. Louis even though public funds are on the table. Instead he's working on a 100% privately financed stadium in a new market.
Even if the Rams end up staying in St. Louis, he's trying to bleed us dry. The man doesn't care about St. Louis. The way he's handled this process has violated NFL rules every step of the way, and they're complicit in allowing it.
Well, as I feared, I think the Rams are gone. I would have to think STL officials knew something, due to the fact that they have continued to refer to STL as an "NFL city", instead of speaking in terms of keeping the Rams 100%. Maybe the activity by Jay Nixon and Dave Peacock is a move to get the Jags, Raiders or another team. If we got the Raiders, I'd want the name changed and the team sold to a local group. NO WAY would I want Mark Davis as our owner. I do think the Rams are history. I know hurdles remain, but this deal is sweet for the league. Throw in the loss of AB, Mike Brown ordeal and other bad PR, STL's stock is at an all time low nationally. Our reputation has been killed in the press. We have no firm deal in place. LA has the bright shiny lights, palm trees, etc.. I think the NFL approves a move no doubt. I just wonder if we get another team or we become the city that gets used over and over by other cities. The NFL should recognize how we've been used and abused, by giving us the JAGS, a franchise that should have been here in the first place. I doubt we get a team ever. With a declining population, media market that is moving out of the top 20 in favor of other cities like Tampa & Denver, I can't see the NFL valuing this market in the future. This is VERY bad news. I think it is HIGHLY unlikely, that Stan is building a stadium for other teams. He is clearly planning on moving the Rams, hence the reason he will not talk or even say anything to give us a small glimmer of hope. He wants out and he will likely get his way. We will be the largest market without a team, once they leave. Next season will be a joke, win or lose. Lots of empty seats. Why should Stan care, when he will make it all back, tenfold, once he gets to LA.
PS_ I can't wait to hear from Kevin Demoff. How can he skate around this once. He is going to have to finally admit, the Rams are looking to move to LA. If he does not, he is just going to look like an untrustworthy idiot. I assume he will not speak to the public at this time.
If anyone hears of an interview being scheduled, please post a link or when/where I can listen. I'm sure KD's phone is blowing up this morning.
DogtownBnR wrote:Well, as I feared, I think the Rams are gone. I would have to think STL officials knew something, due to the fact that they have continued to refer to STL as an "NFL city", instead of speaking in terms of keeping the Rams 100%.
I've heard and seen reported (Mike Bush) that Kroenke hasn't engaged with the task force at all. He was probably acting this way before. So yeah, I'm sure they knew they couldn't count on the Rams for anything at that point.
I don't think that this is a leverage play any longer. The Inglewood deal is for real and Stan wants to be there. This does not come out to scare the STL politicians. This is a real deal that will happen, unless the NFL decides to stop it. I do not see that happening. I think there is too much money to be made. Whether or not the NFL treats us like Cleveland and Baltimore, who knows, but I wouldn't count on it. The pictures of empty seats and perception of our city, will hurt us in the eyes of the NFL. Not to mention, their major sponsor AB, is technically based in NYC, so that is not a factor. I've heard some refer to that as a factor for the NFL. Our only hope is if Shad Kahn wants our of JAX. Who knows if he'd even go to STL first. London is still in play, as is San Antonio, a FAST growing city. I think we could be seeing the last of NFL football here, for a long, long time.
The timing of this doesn't make sense...why not wait til next year? NFL statement after this announcement
“No team has applied for relocation and there will be no team relocations for the 2015 season,” NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy said via email. “We are committed to working towards having franchises that are strong and successful in their existing markets. Any decision on relocation in 2016 or later is subject to approval by the 32 clubs. An affirmative vote by 24 of 32 clubs (three-fourths) is required.”
^^DB, there must be a reason for the timing. It does not make any sense. Now the NFL will have exactly what they said they didn't want. A lame duck franchise that will play in front of an empty stadium for an entire season. Can you imagine the marketing crew from the Rams trying to sell season tix to the current and potential buyers. Good luck with that one. Maybe we can all go to the last home game and wear paper bags, hold anti-Stan signs etc.... Good times!
^I'd like to have a team. It is not the end of the world, but I'd sure like to have one. Not only good for fans of the game, but also keeps STL on the map (in addition to other things, not only thing obviously). Also, if it happened, a large mix-use stadium development north of Lumiere would be great for the city. It may also get us an MLS team, leading to more notoriety for STL, more revenue, MLS and other big (EPL, World Cup) exhibition games. It is much bigger than football and the NFL. There are no guarantees of anything if the Rams leave. Small chance we get another team IMO.
I agree with streibel, seems to me the timing is quite clear.... he's not happy with what is being developed by the Peacock/Blitz team and this is his way of saying "give me more". I think the most interesting local part of the LA Times story is the report that the parties remain over a half a billion dollars apart.
Of course he could also be very earnest in his LA interest and wants to get that stadium process moving ASAP. While it has always been hard to read his interest with the Rams, it has always been clear that he wants to be a player in getting Los Angeles an NFL franchise of some stripe. Now it does seem like he wants it to be the Rams there in his co-owned stadium.
Anyway, we'll soon know how much of an a**hole Kroenke is.
^But they supposedly haven't been in contact with Kroenke. How would Kroenke have anything to be upset about?
Stadiums take a while to build. It wouldn't be until 2018 for this to be finished. If the league wants to have a stadium in place first prior to relocation, you can't wait around for STL to do something. You've got to make it happen. There's no guarantee for Kroenke that the stadium situation here is going to pan out. Think about it from his possible perspective. If he waits for STL to come around and its a crappy proposal/stadium, LA is long gone as an option by that point.
What a sweet deal for Kroenke. He can build a new stadium, and he has three potential teams to occupy it. He may get a new stadium in STL as a result. So say STL gets a new stadium going and the NFL won't let him relocate. If I'm Kroenke "OK, great. I'll stay here in my brand new stadium and rent or sell my new LA stadium to one, maybe two, other franchises that have been wanting stadiums for years."
I think Stan really wants to go to LA. IMO, Stan wants to cash in on an LA deal. I can't blame him, if you put the PR aside and look at it purely from a financial standpoint. If you can make billions, why not risk your reputation and your status as a proud Missourahan....
Also, Kroenke Sports enterprises is perceived as much more of a global player, if the LA RAMS are in their portfolio versus the STL RAMS.
I don't think we can judge Stan until a move is finalized, but he sure hasn't helped himself in STL , PR -wise. I will reserve judgment until the deal is finalized. I think it will be at some point in the future, probably after the lame-duck 2016 season.
pat wrote:^But they supposedly haven't been in contact with Kroenke. How would Kroenke have anything to be upset about?
Kroenke himself may not have been taking direct part in discussions, but the Rams organization has. Plus even the public knows the general outline of what is being contemplated on the Peacock/Blitz side.
I'm going to stick by my 2015 prediction that Rams will get a St. Louis stadium deal by end of year and Stan will put them up for sale.
I don't think you can discount the fact that NFL is looking at expanding by two teams as well as the fact that they know that getting two new stadiums for Raiders and Chargers is a long shot. So why not get St. Louis squared away and let the teams sale finance Stan K's new LA franchise fee/stadium and see Raiders will co-share stadium. That 49ers become Bay area beloved team once and for all, LA gets two teams and both San Diego/St. Louis remain NFL markets and owners are happy Stan K is footing full bill to make up for his family real estate connections that gave him a fast track on a stadium deal. It is also easier on NFL checkbook to finance three stadiums between St. Louis, LA two team stadium (Expansion, Raiders) and San Antonio as the LA market leverage is slowing losing its steam. The 2018 timeline fits while for all of the above. Purely speculation but NFL/Stan K appear have more than one option to LA if you look in terms of NFL expansion.
